summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/b9/7c3ec07b849c1c03434e6507e7d8e87cddc6cc
blob: a8bd810568e6b0d5fdeadccb9e2bb068b946ce77 (plain)
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
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C413AC002D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 10 Dec 2022 18:07:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E12240922
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 10 Dec 2022 18:07:27 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 7E12240922
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key,
 unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=i/lxLgOx
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id ZC4JkdY7d0CV
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 10 Dec 2022 18:07:25 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 457CE40544
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 457CE40544
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sat, 10 Dec 2022 18:07:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9594C5C009A;
 Sat, 10 Dec 2022 13:07:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163])
 by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 10 Dec 2022 13:07:19 -0500
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=
 fm2; t=1670695639; x=1670782039; bh=xojec/HYGGjMUFfHbfl7wq+22K53
 ZliwoSkl+FLxXv4=; b=i/lxLgOxyuCSqgJ+bcN+yWpgItFyfXfz5Jzny3VzGHmO
 WYNV5WHRT6Dqj4ZiHFCAh3jvrQn70B87CbsUz1GIPeSleTJoRQNr7H4SUO/OJe/G
 5+Zxb42nwsRee9maF4GfKHMjlUdCRY7Ske5+8odJxuufpPtFnZTqI6eBlr8kPgT8
 aG4XcC4b8Y1PJzaWRuWrUjEqPDARdAIqRJn3FjnHZU4Bstv0GvYmNhpHzURlw6uR
 mtkEZBduZuuhExHbjG7ECBZoPaowwNeyJSnjn8r6zkcMuqC7k4NQL6G7hpaSOKic
 AngPwDC7xaBwR1P9RmRz1EmkzrAlBYlQMPypkOM1NA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:1sqUY96Hi08bTiM__2-SVW5ufFykxTL4T351knkSjMNeJHa0m-O5hg>
 <xme:1sqUY65pGEe3CT4R5ko_emteE7-8AhPKPKmG1mKwzl66Z-o3EKyr6NCC1zljg1XaO
 THh1KbW4IEUmp-hsYU>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:1sqUY0erH3x0uE7-cOkVjmcxz_afSs9-k7BwW6UAjwmzbHJN8eJvWS87FyjoIbhY1bKofzf9g1Nx8Yf-UwNtLKKoy9goqo1d>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrvdeggddutdejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
 fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
 uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtd
 erredttddunecuhfhrohhmpefrvghtvghrucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhht
 ohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepieeugfethfehgfdtuddvudduvefgte
 ffhfekjeffleelleffudffkeeihfeuudfhnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtgho
 mhdpsghlohgtkhhsthhrvggrmhdrihhnfhhopdhpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuve
 hluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvsehp
 vghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhg
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:1sqUY2IjtQkMRsLC3V_FYPP9OrHtNqmtE5wPhcss65bEMii5VdLZVA>
 <xmx:1sqUYxLhhbYR9pD4Z4IX_iSfdijBghlvf5yGmW1KQJ_e1PdxF8kvxA>
 <xmx:1sqUY_yctZhI39hIqOOgjI-o40FbN2Rx-naFrS28E-KNFSUgQ7g40A>
 <xmx:18qUY-Hnw1R5VTGV5MmG7i3c_uTgT2wacfpQSB7rweqs-9YWRfQUIA>
Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sat,
 10 Dec 2022 13:07:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id 1A2735F9A4; Sat, 10 Dec 2022 13:07:18 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2022 13:07:18 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: 0xB10C <b10c@b10c.me>
Message-ID: <Y5TK1kaWtBnz6NqX@petertodd.org>
References: <Y2I3w8O5X55sD/3C@petertodd.org> <Y2qc7Ubc5xtJhxGw@petertodd.org>
 <Y3MlSE7AWkBgiCyr@erisian.com.au>
 <f146ca66-a611-f129-ae11-6907a7333d10@b10c.me>
 <Y5OlpAi3wHPKxxkx@petertodd.org>
 <ff27975a-78b0-f697-8e88-0d0e5e5dddb6@b10c.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="F+8hPIjXyNesmUwe"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ff27975a-78b0-f697-8e88-0d0e5e5dddb6@b10c.me>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Announcement: Full-RBF Miner Bounty
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: Sat, 10 Dec 2022 18:07:27 -0000


--F+8hPIjXyNesmUwe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 12:59:05PM +0100, 0xB10C wrote:
> On 12/9/22 22:16, Peter Todd wrote:
> >> For further monitoring, I've set-up a mempoolfullrbf=3D1 node and are
> >> logging replacement events with [0]. I filter the full-RBF replacements
> >> and list the replaced and replacement transactions here:
> > Question: are you taking any special steps to peer that node with other
> > full-rbf nodes? I see you are in fact getting all the replacements I'd =
expect
> > you to get, so you must have good peering. I'm curious what it took (if
> > anything) to achieve that. Also, is that node accepting incoming connec=
tions?
> No special steps like #25600 preferential peering or similar. I suspect
> I was lucky to have a full-RBF peer (or more than one) from the start or
> there are more mempoolfullrbf=3D1 nodes than I'd think on the network. The
> node accepts incoming connections on a non-default port and currently
> has 45 inbound slots filled up. Mostly buy v23.0 and v24.0 nodes though,
> as older Bitcoin Core version usually don't connect to non-default port
> peers.

Interesting! I'm running a full-rbf node that is (manually) connected to a =
few
hundred v24.0 nodes to ensure good propagation. But I'm only connected to
standard ports (I'm reusing the DNS seed list). So you must have a full-rbf
peer purely by luck.

Could you please grep your logs for which peer(s) are sending you replaceme=
nts?
I don't want to know the IP addresses. I'm just curious if you have exactly=
 one
full-rbf peer or more.

BTW I have Antoine's preferential peering patch ported to v24.0, along with=
 a
few other minor fixes:

https://github.com/petertodd/bitcoin/tree/full-rbf-v24.0

I think it'd be reasonable for you to run that, as what's more interesting =
is
the replacements, not whether or not propagation happens to work out of the
box.

> > https://blockstream.info also enabled full-rbf a few days ago. But curr=
ently
> > propagation to their nodes is spotty, so replacements don't always show=
 up.
>=20
> Since my last post, five full-RBF replacements have been mined in two
> blocks:
>=20
> 766733 by Luxor:
>=20
> =A0=A0=A0 41d497d64bfa71390408ddb65c478a5400c721c71336fa51509929f19a5c8aa=
5 1x
> P2WPKH in -> 1x P2WPKH out (12.50 sat/vByte)
> =A0=A0=A0 3061eec0b57346c01419db091ce3af16094e796db91f4f3eb9b7ad42ce8f6e25
> OpenTimestamps Alice ~170 USD bounty (6424.72 sat/vByte)
> =A0=A0=A0 9000f73e818af9019d26b2edde6e8e11f67d6d6f35916dabd808bbdd314ce80=
7 1x
> P2WPKH in -> 1x P2WPKH out=A0 (22.73 sat/vByte)
> =A0=A0=A0 3843e93a0ec5cf09d757fd497fdda8f15f5094c64b149624c5d343b24e675093
> OpenTimestamps Bob (108.25 sat/vByte)
>=20
> It seems like Luxor (5.5 EH/s or 2.11% network hashrate in the last 7
> days)[0] might have mempoolfullrbf=3D1 enabled.
>=20
> 766736 by AntPool:
>=20
> =A0=A0 3c96fe8136de98a91d0add7e51fcacef813071d43feccc51987dc8378f6913e1
> OpenTimestamps Bob (4.25 sat/vByte)
>=20
> I'm not too sure if AntPool has full RBF enabled based on this one
> transaction. 3c96fe.. is the first replacement of
> 903f03b16e69f9f3fc6bb8d008338da37efc3f235fc5091ca767baae96834d95 (1.19
> sat/vByte) which they might not have seen (?). They have nearly 20% of
> the network hashrate [0], so if the have mempoolfullrbf=3D1 set, we should
> see them include more full-RBF replacements soonish. There was also
> 1467e3dbf9e9f3d9cd8e7cc4009cd9c1457e164f0dd87525c72e921d7a27ab1f which
> bumped 3c96fe.. by 1.53 sat/vByte, but was only broadcast shortly before
> AntPool found the block. The might not have seen it yet.

So according to my logs the replacement that AntPool mined, 3c96fe813, was =
the
third replacement in a row of four replacements:

2022-12-10T07:46:09Z [mempool] AcceptToMemoryPool: peer=3D<snip>: accepted =
903f03b16e69f9f3fc6bb8d008338da37efc3f235fc5091ca767baae96834d95 (poolsz 63=
20 txn, 90818 kB)
2022-12-10T07:47:14Z [mempool] replacing tx 903f03b16e69f9f3fc6bb8d008338da=
37efc3f235fc5091ca767baae96834d95 with f8bef985457f9e5bbf5b583e33cca43d515a=
3a73e1bb6a2c5a11646632123aa2 for 0.00000234 additional fees, 0 delta bytes
2022-12-10T08:01:09Z [mempool] replacing tx f8bef985457f9e5bbf5b583e33cca43=
d515a3a73e1bb6a2c5a11646632123aa2 with 3c96fe8136de98a91d0add7e51fcacef8130=
71d43feccc51987dc8378f6913e1 for 0.00000234 additional fees, 0 delta bytes
2022-12-10T08:06:06Z [mempool] replacing tx 3c96fe8136de98a91d0add7e51fcace=
f813071d43feccc51987dc8378f6913e1 with 1467e3dbf9e9f3d9cd8e7cc4009cd9c1457e=
164f0dd87525c72e921d7a27ab1f for 0.00000234 additional fees, 0 delta bytes

There's significant time between tx #2 and tx #3, and the block was found s=
oon
after #4 reached my node, so it's quite possible that AntPool was in fact
running full-rbf and they simply didn't see #4 in time.

Big pools tend to run many different nodes at once, splitting up hash rate
between them, so they could be simply running full-rbf on a subset of their
hashing power to test it out. I noticed F2Pool mined a few full-rbf
replacements a few weeks ago too (they also mined a replacement that appear=
ed
to be due to them starting a new node, with an empty mempool).

Similarly, note how Luxor has mined a few blocks since #766733, without min=
ing
full-rbf replacements.


I'll also note that Foundry USA mined a doublespend,
fab4df6b9b51dcfe94b366f17bccca50430f4ceb274a87f948a5493cd31a8551, which your
site shows. In that case according to my logs the two transactions were sent
essentially simultaneously, so likely just an accident of propagation. But =
it's
good to remind people that such double-spends are easy. :)

> I've also updated the site to allow only showing the replacements that
> were mined.

Thanks! That's very useful.

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

--F+8hPIjXyNesmUwe
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=e+/p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--F+8hPIjXyNesmUwe--