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
|
Return-Path: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76146C002A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 May 2023 16:19:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 435556144D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 May 2023 16:19:12 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 435556144D
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gazeta.pl header.i=@gazeta.pl
header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=2013 header.b=E0Ao6UX5
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001,
SPF_HELO_NONE=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 8HGwAgtFC4t9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 May 2023 16:19:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org B4BCB610F8
Received: from smtpa40.poczta.onet.pl (smtpa40.poczta.onet.pl [213.180.142.40])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4BCB610F8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 10 May 2023 16:19:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pmq8v.m5r2.onet (pmq8v.m5r2.onet [10.174.35.145])
by smtp.poczta.onet.pl (Onet) with ESMTP id 4QGgFg30GfzlhVZY;
Wed, 10 May 2023 18:19:03 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gazeta.pl; s=2013;
t=1683735543; bh=5ZtW/Dkwh1YF/LcuTkCfOeaccF0iub2yrPXHSHd0Kbc=;
h=From:To:Date:Subject:From;
b=E0Ao6UX50s4PsYO/81Iwt/Oc0JnH66pGznb/oM2PDuB72Jr5GRZH5WiWn1uefnn4S
YTxfcHpJ1w09JVg/e/96kwDh/YmfMKDH+St1qeR7eJbuL0skByZ3bN66EKxY0zRROM
B98Ih2/1MR1NIXH55EMCRm3jOSw17CWHi4w+lHf8=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received: from [5.173.248.149] by pmq8v.m5r2.onet via HTTP id ;
Wed, 10 May 2023 18:19:03 +0200
From: vjudeu@gazeta.pl
X-Priority: 3
To: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 18:19:01 +0200
Message-Id: <158873530-26c4ca5223c12fad28089c0ab56e9528@pmq8v.m5r2.onet>
X-Mailer: onet.poczta
X-Onet-PMQ: <vjudeu@gazeta.pl>;5.173.248.149;PL;2
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 10 May 2023 16:51:14 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] tx max fee
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: Wed, 10 May 2023 16:19:12 -0000
> possible to change tx "max fee" to output amounts?
Is it possible? Yes. Should we do that? My first thought was "maybe", but a=
fter thinking more about it, I would say "no", here is why:
Starting point: 1 BTC on some output.
Current situation: A single transaction moving 0.99999000 BTC as fees, and =
creating 1000 satoshis as some output (I know, allowed dust values are lowe=
r and depend on address type, but let's say it is 1k sats to make things si=
mpler).
And then, there is a room for other solutions, for example your rule, menti=
oned in other posts, like this one: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/piper=
mail/bitcoin-dev/2023-May/021626.html
> probably easier just to reject any transaction where the fee is higher th=
an the sum of the outputs
Possible situation after introducing your proposal, step-by-step:
1) Someone wants to move 1 BTC, and someone wants to pay 0.99999000 BTC as =
fees. Assuming your rules are on consensus level, the first transaction cre=
ates 0.5 BTC output and 0.5 BTC fee.
2) That person still wants to move 0.5 remaining BTC, and still is willing =
to pay 0.49999000 BTC as fees. Guess what will happen: you will see another=
transaction, creating 0.25 BTC output, and paying 0.25 BTC fee.
...
N) Your proposal replaced one transaction, consuming maybe one kilobyte, wi=
th a lot of transactions, doing exactly the same, but where fees are distri=
buted between many transactions.
Before thinking about improving that system, consider one simple thing: is =
it possible to avoid "max fee rule", no matter in what way it will be defin=
ed? Because as shown above, the answer seems to be "yes", because you can a=
lways replace a single transaction moving 1 BTC as fees with multiple trans=
actions, each paying one satoshi per virtual byte, and then instead of cons=
uming around one kilobyte, it would consume around 1 MvB per 0.01 BTC, so 1=
00 MvB per 1 BTC mentioned in the example above.
On 2023-05-08 13:55:18 user Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@list=
s.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
possible to change tx "max fee"=C2=A0 to output amounts?
seems like the only use case that would support such a tx is spam/dos type =
stuff that satoshi warned about
its not a fix for everything, but it seems could help a bit with certain at=
tacks=C2=A0
|
