path: root/1c/fabed50ccf546b1c7918c2fcd222edeaa6387b

Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D497FC002D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 31 Oct 2022 17:51:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990A360AD8
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 31 Oct 2022 17:51:17 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 990A360AD8
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key,
 unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=At6UqSTM
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id AySZ_364Er0X
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 31 Oct 2022 17:51:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org EBD20607C1
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.27])
 by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBD20607C1
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 31 Oct 2022 17:51:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 616F55C0103;
 Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:51:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
 by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:51:13 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id
 :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id
 :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to
 :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=
 fm3; t=1667238673; x=1667325073; bh=a/JxqbPUfX7BKHVEJdKHFyxXlIJg
 lN96HHKo4KEdeSo=; b=At6UqSTMfdQspZsOY2gnDDxNHfOQ4q/TIM6IfVFYJ5GS
 XZL6YVhSXRTaa23s5oHaaQmllSrWdQV+4TZcXuMj9Ig1LAN/vtJQKu9r1dUxo1rn
 ZIq08f/81UQDBgoQ0N7mjgLaX3/xHCxBkcW377jWbcWejbS3LnLKM7bTXkmYfOlw
 fPhK49wh4cnLfimDSImin3liLCFp8WDyA3KJIE/IFayg/CvbjrotBK+Wn6HNml3b
 38LGQOUIKacxlPGVTJfDfAfWvco4EHyOkdECpHXQvk3u2MTPwKRfS2azIDHQNH2V
 7VSAS+AW4IPAiP6EQdj5UhGd+GUHEsY90g/EG0AppQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:EAtgYxqE4dt1gQcZH5twcaxXLdMcwmYVPsnQaRtRjV7_yKhNGL-SNg>
 <xme:EAtgYzq3otcKhrFJAc1Yt27-WLKgJUkgOyRS8_7nmKq_UDyNjtMwFhb8m_S2cvnUA
 jMKb7_qd6ao8-H07lw>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:EAtgY-N3vi3XPyg7gRVGSHixmmM5kZFRmHR_uxzMg_luIKrPQTzuVPmUUhZ97kSodlxjM2xnEM-cWw-Qrd1IvE80Cng0_4fF>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvgedrudefgddutdegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
 fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
 uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne
 cujfgurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddtvdenucfhrhhomheprfgvthgv
 rhcuvfhougguuceophgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtth
 gvrhhnpedttdegtdffteeukeffhfffkeekiefhteduvdetjeeujeffgeevgefhudetjefh
 veenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgne
 cuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgv
 sehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhg
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:EAtgY85p9j2LjzmWAVJlDDK9GxsTtBAJNZPtsGLkZghS4gqhB_jJ3w>
 <xmx:EAtgYw7lJS8zUJ1HuQQVq1V6BokMlj5zrCyVrUD2U-KgrYUIWfHbTA>
 <xmx:EAtgY0i3u-y-2tk4hxfsGcwgCbmssQwxxQjYURDEikjG4y1goJRuKw>
 <xmx:EQtgY73RhzxuS2fa_t9KNBBwLs1HGi9tmA5hxLEsG4mpBkRepuo2bg>
Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon,
 31 Oct 2022 13:51:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id 5E64E5F86F; Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:51:10 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 13:51:10 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: email@yancy.lol,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <Y2ALDu36tMQxVr/i@petertodd.org>
References: <Y1nIKjQC3DkiSGyw@erisian.com.au>
 <CAFp6fsFm06J2G1=3ojQvcL9gbEbQ41C4rmf3=Jkm9Qm0VBhhKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB3F3Dt=2hDXXw6Jz9QwnotkNLyGdZn9GZLHFXu0Dnyz3tsc0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <23dac89d36c356b9266db07e09c2de8e@yancy.lol>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UiZssDDyd9AgECKb"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <23dac89d36c356b9266db07e09c2de8e@yancy.lol>
Cc: Greg Sanders <gsanders87@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] On mempool policy consistency
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, 31 Oct 2022 17:51:17 -0000


--UiZssDDyd9AgECKb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 06:21:08PM +0100, yancy via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>=20
> Protocol Devs,
>=20
> After reading through this email thread and BIP125, I'm curious if non-rbf
> nodes will relay full-rbf transactions and vice versa.  That is to say, if
> only one non-rbf node exists on the network, however, every other node
> implements full-rbf, will the transaction still be propagated?  IE can we
> always guarantee a path through the network for either transaction type no
> matter what the combination of network policies are?

1) There are nodes that signal full-rbf, and preferentially peer to each ot=
her,
thus ensuring good transaction propagation. The most recent patch to implem=
ent
this is: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25600

There's enough peers running full-rbf that the last time I started up a new
node on a fresh IP address, it happened to have a peer relaying full-rbf
replacements to it. And of course, if people want full-rbf to work more
reliably, it's very easy to just run some nodes with a large number of outg=
oing
peers. Changing the hard-coded 8 outgoing peers to, say, 800, isn't very ha=
rd.

2) There's nothing special about a "full-rbf transaction" other than the fa=
ct
that it's replacing a previously broadcast transaction that didn't signal
replacement. There is not consensus over the mempool, so in certain cases
non-full-rbf nodes will in fact broadcast replacements when they didn't hap=
pen
to receive the "first" transaction first.

The latter makes testing full-rbf a bit problematic, as if you don't take
special measures to ensure good propagation a small % of the time the
"replacement" transaction will in fact be the one that gets gets mined.

> > Does fullrbf offer any benefits other than breaking zeroconf
> > business practices?  If so, what are they?
>=20
> I think AJ mentioned this earlier, but adding more configuration options
> always increases code complexity, and with that, there is likely more
> unforeseen bugs.  However, there is a section of network participants that
> rely on both types of transaction policy, so from my limited view-point, =
it
> seems worth accommodating if possible.

Since all the machinery to do replacemnt already exists, adding a full-rbf
config flag is particularly trivial. It requires just a single line in the
mempool code.

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--UiZssDDyd9AgECKb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=5ySU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UiZssDDyd9AgECKb--