MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDqXXvNCZ7EyKuwudB5J0YDX7hNnXHPZNxTO0_JsM+yNHg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEgR2PGCZ=F85yjAbZgC6NtzhpdgBL3n4M2jowN12wJ7x-Ai1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PGrxDQE0k8WX4XXz9GN-RAL6JB51ST9Hdz=ba36gRCa6A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PFjt=ihzRBhNXbHTAJz1R+3vz8o-zRZkDA3iBo39x9cTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PFfSjJjkTYq+DAmTzmkHPxqhn6fUDoXTzrRebz+OoUgqw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PG5ZueHKDXbsPDEjQG7xAYBa_JAtPZo9n1V2=STC1srpA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PGPQ1e9SmoWOS3V+N9v+OWiM4g3nPN3d9urc+DfkWEJ7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PEKkHH6+Sh8cQGF83-s1tpwQZgd0fiuNz_xyWu0mUPfCA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PEyWFO1RFohVEpcb-M7aM-8xjCFvDPeJPD4zF4yTCyZ0A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEgR2PGrf+4pQRyNC_xKVEKXimKTWveGK9q6YJeZkG0_r=8tkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5F7A4F74-B108-4E30-A3F4-4125BBD0F819@friedenbach.org>
	<CABm2gDqXXvNCZ7EyKuwudB5J0YDX7hNnXHPZNxTO0_JsM+yNHg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 05:55:58 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqmOXGZ_qxyNjFYg8qTRu4Tmo7V+zYZCt0j5RekUNVkWw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark <mark@friedenbach.org>, 
	Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c14a38491edca055a601eb5"
Cc: Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Rebatable fees & incentive-safe fee markets
Precedence: list

--94eb2c14a38491edca055a601eb5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Gmaxwell I think what's new is that in this case, with a single tx you
would take out all txs with fee below 1 btc. With current rules, you would
only remove enoguh txs for that one to fit, not empty the whole block and
mine only a block with that single tx.

On 30 Sep 2017 5:53 am, "Jorge Tim=C3=B3n" <jtimon@jtimon.cc> wrote:

> I really don't see how this "outlier behaviour" can be prevented. I think
> it would be the norm even with your proposed "fix". Perhaps I'm missing
> something too.
>
> On 29 Sep 2017 5:24 pm, "Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev" <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> This is correct. Under assumptions of a continuous mempool model however
>> this should be considered the outlier behavior, other than a little bit =
of
>> empty space at the end, now and then. A maximum fee rate calculated as a
>> filter over past block rates could constrain this outlier behavior from
>> ever happening too.
>>
>> > On Sep 29, 2017, at 3:43 AM, Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Maybe I'm getting this wrong but wouldn't this scheme imply that a
>> miner is incentivized to limit the amount of transactions in a block to
>> capture the maximum fee of the ones included?
>> >
>> > 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, th=
en
>> the miner would be incentivized to include my transaction alone to avoid
>> that lower fee paying transactions reduce the amount of fees he can earn
>> from my transaction alone. This would mean that I could literally clog t=
he
>> network by paying 1btc every ten minutes.
>> >
>> > Am I missing something?
>> >
>> > Daniele
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>

--94eb2c14a38491edca055a601eb5
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto">Gmaxwell I think what&#39;s new is that in this case, wit=
h a single tx you would take out all txs with fee below 1 btc. With current=
 rules, you would only remove enoguh txs for that one to fit, not empty the=
 whole block and mine only a block with that single tx.</div><div class=3D"=
gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 30 Sep 2017 5:53 am, &quot;J=
orge Tim=C3=B3n&quot; &lt;jtimon@jtimon.cc&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attributio=
n"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left=
:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto">I really don&#39;t see =
how this &quot;outlier behaviour&quot; can be prevented. I think it would b=
e the norm even with your proposed &quot;fix&quot;. Perhaps I&#39;m missing=
 something too.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On 29 Sep 2017 5:24 pm, &quot;Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev&quot; &l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank=
">bitcoin-dev@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attr=
ibution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;borde=
r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">This is correct. Under assumptions =
of a continuous mempool model however this should be considered the outlier=
 behavior, other than a little bit of empty space at the end, now and then.=
 A maximum fee rate calculated as a filter over past block rates could cons=
train this outlier behavior from ever happening too.<br>
<br>
&gt; On Sep 29, 2017, at 3:43 AM, Daniele Pinna &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:danie=
le.pinna@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">daniele.pinna@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote=
:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Maybe I&#39;m getting this wrong but wouldn&#39;t this scheme imply th=
at a miner is incentivized to limit the amount of transactions in a block t=
o capture the maximum fee of the ones included?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; 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, the=
n the miner would be incentivized to include my transaction alone to avoid =
that lower fee paying transactions reduce the amount of fees he can earn fr=
om my transaction alone. This would mean that I could literally clog the ne=
twork by paying 1btc every ten minutes.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Am I missing something?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Daniele<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat<wbr>ion.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-d<wbr>ev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>

--94eb2c14a38491edca055a601eb5--