1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
|
Return-Path: <murch@murch.one>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00414C0037
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:19:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A82918089E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:19:36 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org A82918089E
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8,
DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001,
SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 2rIrqgOnruuc
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:19:35 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: delayed 400 seconds by postgrey-1.37 at util1.osuosl.org;
Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:19:34 UTC
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org EF57881405
Received: from farbauti.uberspace.de (farbauti.uberspace.de [185.26.156.235])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF57881405
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:19:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 31008 invoked by uid 989); 22 Jan 2024 18:12:52 -0000
Authentication-Results: farbauti.uberspace.de;
auth=pass (plain)
Received: from unknown (HELO unkown) (::1)
by farbauti.uberspace.de (Haraka/3.0.1) with ESMTPSA;
Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:12:52 +0100
Message-ID: <9a89eca8-61fd-4156-825d-c9b718dc3034@murch.one>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:12:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <Zalsq+Nq7RRr/CAR@petertodd.org>
From: Murch <murch@murch.one>
In-Reply-To: <Zalsq+Nq7RRr/CAR@petertodd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Rspamd-Bar: ---
X-Rspamd-Report: BAYES_HAM(-2.95226) XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01) MIME_GOOD(-0.1)
X-Rspamd-Score: -3.04226
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=murch.one; s=uberspace;
h=from; bh=obQxK2riTele0BdOgb/R5gUxS/rpN3qtqy+TfS0oZXE=;
b=hnOmrO8Q57CVH8BvPC8GR5d2zSJ2cTM2AkgjzJh0GjTrM3ZekcjZl2qjHz7fBI0U8qvqd73LUO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Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] One-Shot Replace-By-Fee-Rate
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:19:37 -0000
Hi Peter,
On 1/18/24 13:23, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Reposting this blog post here for discussion:
>
> https://petertodd.org/2024/one-shot-replace-by-fee-rate
I saw your proposal mentioned on Stacker News and read it with interest.
In response, I described a replacement cycle that can be used to
broadcast the same five transactions repeatedly:
https://stacker.news/items/393182
The gist is that by using two confirmed inputs and five transactions,
you can use RBFr to reduce the absolute fee while raising the feerate to
top block levels, then immediately use the current RBF rules to
introduce a high-feerate transaction that beats the RBFr transaction but
is hampered by a low-feerate parent and not attractive for mining, then
use RBF to replace its low-feerate parent, then use the RBFr transaction
again to reduce the absolute feerate. Due to the asymmetric
replacements, the same transactions can replace each other in that order
in every cycle. Please refer to the linked write-up for details, I’ve
included weights, fees, and a transaction graph to make my example
comprehensible.
Among those five transactions, the only transaction attractive for block
inclusion would be the small RBFr transaction with a
bottom-of-the-next-block feerate. Today, if it were mined it would
amount to fees of around 4000 sats every few blocks to make the entire
network relay transactions of more than 205,000 vB every few seconds.
Given that my example is minimal, it should be possible to further
increase bandwidth cost.
Assuming that I did not make a mistake, i.e. all the replacements are
viable and my scenario is compatible with your proposal, the described
One-Shot Replace-By-Fee-Rate proposal would not be safe for deployment
on the network.
Best,
Murch
|
