Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63B0BAB6 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:22:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pf0-f173.google.com (mail-pf0-f173.google.com [209.85.192.173]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB33C467 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:22:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-f173.google.com with SMTP id y29so903453pff.0 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=friedenbach-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=C5bf392EmKv1ZosA891C/batIVt5mWTsFNyZTTFXVSY=; b=iCLJYTh3cTkj4y8488bz+S1q4JDvODh9l6T3OI8nzyrO8OTIOVbqVhBsAn/jCT6X5T n1ei5rz6vZdY3HM2uFgax43X9ep5maY/r5VY7X53gygRyalbVSk5qMAAIvIaWMs8fxnw gMlVsDzYGPvLX16O0cQN7HTp90ojyFEadRvVUxg1fYWiNuH9FQDWW4V6FevN4CqDDqEV Yat0gaYfEMZw56hfla8s1q+Kzfg1c9tqS5Zspw9CAiaqZv98HBLH+9Bam7QQRUAm8VTW Xvhf5MGHKR+CewUiiABJJY3UQvjJ9MntrOuRnfUrw8zOfbv738AhRBH3wE0r8Z20ei+n ty6w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=C5bf392EmKv1ZosA891C/batIVt5mWTsFNyZTTFXVSY=; b=JxQyTVoyBArrswsZluqqqymsX3TBCVcFfDEGi+IgtOeaZhQFL0INu56s38IRt+4azg BaQ5W7doIaAXzHLXQwMLWq3mMNcdydmeo/MadV7sbZfzBYIkrAJ5q/EoBaq46zi158xx mJBiV3Hy10ft3gy6e7KfRmMz3imLZNIYN6NhLlvjH1RKAFI+7j+QP+V8FQajDvgBt2ax IKH7BBmKk9ca5WXRvT3fG41yejISaltfDPSq1uS1BzJrOv7vk7Fl7vKBoY8bEwcR5zS/ OavsIdkhKjyNkDm3UYH3VZWR1Ju0sCWeoXMACiOdveV2m/Ul0TJW6EyavNx+86b/Smw/ 2goQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjITTl3161O2PUH2VvpVeF/n0QvuYzChMaSketxiZsYJDVGLTHQ 0XMSu1iFKC4fBByHgVfsNHme9N54yBw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAVNzpy9Ofc7sBpu9ZfYwbMVCQaj5siU/5UYreSF+lEzyDOgsX0Ax8h0o1kR8jjVWClzSmtgw== X-Received: by 10.84.218.198 with SMTP id g6mr7317854plm.23.1506698536170; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:646:8080:1291:e45d:dd5d:7212:1e7c? ([2601:646:8080:1291:e45d:dd5d:7212:1e7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y16sm6835943pfe.68.2017.09.29.08.22.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:15 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Mark Friedenbach X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15A402) In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:14 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5F7A4F74-B108-4E30-A3F4-4125BBD0F819@friedenbach.org> References: To: Daniele Pinna X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:23:36 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Rebatable fees & incentive-safe fee markets X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:22:18 -0000 This is correct. Under assumptions of a continuous mempool model however thi= s should be considered the outlier behavior, other than a little bit of empt= y space at the end, now and then. A maximum fee rate calculated as a filter o= ver past block rates could constrain this outlier behavior from ever happeni= ng too. > On Sep 29, 2017, at 3:43 AM, Daniele Pinna wrote= : >=20 > Maybe I'm getting this wrong but wouldn't this scheme imply that a miner i= s incentivized to limit the amount of transactions in a block to capture the= maximum fee of the ones included? >=20 > As an example, mined blocks currently carry ~0.8 btc in fees right now. If= I were to submit a transaction paying 1 btc in maximal money fees, then the= miner would be incentivized to include my transaction alone to avoid that l= ower fee paying transactions reduce the amount of fees he can earn from my t= ransaction alone. This would mean that I could literally clog the network by= paying 1btc every ten minutes. >=20 > Am I missing something? >=20 > Daniele=20