Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74248C0032 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA4340194 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:02:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 5BA4340194 Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm1 header.b=W5mNes70 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 smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 75AI398WP-Qk for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8ECC640192 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:02:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 8ECC640192 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF0B13200952 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:02:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:02:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :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=fm1; t=1692194565; x= 1692280965; bh=nJVHpilt1SK7ifzXmNMFeCsI6wqTBH5OFLbTZdUouvY=; b=W 5mNes70ceWhLqiymOYXJVebliV7h+NAKkT94rSDfQYS6tWoTlgUPeklvzDxlpeiV e6kRrVoOG1OuZwN0+FEsOXfFHg9Pcd8W9hpSV++BhO2n3dZXzmRq6dVLIFRGJItc VRjp+5S8Xi/VBtMmmeFP9yiUpGHKo+GFBdZwFj6G+2MoZIzQ8TMF6fslEOQAlZXo BbeHeSuhTTw4b0sHR0HcZs/cKo4q855meoWheYsvIFlXXaN/23sA271LZCFzxc2Y gjZUCxNMnoJHm2k49/lq4F0MGXMl7J/+dh8COkXFSaOJgFVY+8/i/TqUBN2A5qiq LLZb8zy46IxmnpjxD3aZg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedviedruddtledgjedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvufgfjghfkfggtgfgsehtqh hmtddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpefrvghtvghrucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhht ohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhephfetueelffdvudejjeetjeejgfejfe elieeijeduieeivdeugefffeeugeelgfeunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfr rghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:02:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 16:02:41 +0200 From: Peter Todd To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <728F778B-8748-493A-A151-4CD37BDF5937@petertodd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Full-RBF testing: at least 31% of hash power, over at least 4 pools, is mining full-RBF right now X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:02:47 -0000 On August 16, 2023 12:25:58 PM GMT+02:00, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote: >Since Andrew Chow criticized my use of OTS(1) to measure full-RBF adoptio= n, Correction: Anthony Towns I am truly terrible with names=2E=2E=2E