Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.212.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.212.175; envelope-from=etotheipi@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-wi0-f175.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+8xBpc5CZ9Sx4MwPdeS0-5frnV9B+mJ5OwcPoUVrygTawiJBg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+8xBpc5CZ9Sx4MwPdeS0-5frnV9B+mJ5OwcPoUVrygTawiJBg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:19:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CALf2ePzvwW6VU0YA+6WNCBHzK2rGc5p1uXGvbYG2uS__S-bjoQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043c093ec0d3d504bd803ce4
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin TX fill-or-kill deterministic
	behavior
Precedence: list

--f46d043c093ec0d3d504bd803ce4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

My one big concern about this that users find a way to exploit this
behavior for themselves.  If it's too easy for users to create tx they know
will get stuck and expire, it's no different than letting them cancel their
zero-conf transactions.  i.e. I pay 0.5 BTC in a store for a candy bar, so
I send it using a combination of inputs and fees that I know will lead to
it being stuck and expire.

On the other hand, if such conditions are deterministic enough, it could be
detected by the recipient and flagged.

It's not a huge deal, but it's something to consider.

-Alan


On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com> wrote:

> Not sure whether this rises to the level of a BIP or not, as it is
> largely an implementation change.
>
> One of my From-Day-One complaints about bitcoin is that transactions
> behavior could be far more deterministic (predictable), from a user
> standpoint.  Transactions in the current system can easily remain in
> limbo forever.
>
> One big step in making transactions behave more predictably would be
> to remove transactions from the memory pool, if they have not made it
> into a block for a couple days.  i.e.
>
> 1.  N = 1 or 2 or whatever the community prefers.  Ideally enough time
> for a third-tier miner, mining strange TXs, finds a block.
> 2.  H1 = height of block chain, when a TX is received
> 3.  H2 = H1 + (144 * N)
> 4.  If block chain height reaches H2, and TX has not made it into a
> block, drop TX from memory pool
>
> Although this only impacts a small amount of TX's ultimately, what it
> does do is give us the ability -- once miners have upgraded to this
> rule -- to tell bitcoin users that their transactions "expire" after N
> days.
>
> Backwards compatibility should not be an issue; clients are free to
> retransmit their TX at any time, as usual, thereby "resetting the
> clock" for all peers who have forgotten the TX in question.
>
> Once in place, clients may then implement code that notices a TX has
> expired (read: likely to have been forgotten by the network, assuming
> they themselves have stopped retransmitting it).  Then you can start
> working on wallet/coin recovery, perhaps resending with a higher fee
> etc.
>
> The above change is not really "fill-or-kill" but it should be a big
> step, opening the door to deterministic TX behavior.
>
> --
> Jeff Garzik
> exMULTI, Inc.
> jgarzik@exmulti.com
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
> Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
> Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

--f46d043c093ec0d3d504bd803ce4
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My one big concern about this that users find a way to exploit this behavio=
r for themselves. =A0<meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html=
; charset=3Dutf-8">If it&#39;s too easy for users to create tx they know wi=
ll get stuck and expire, it&#39;s no different than letting them cancel the=
ir zero-conf transactions. =A0i.e. I pay 0.5 BTC in a store for a candy bar=
, so I send it using a combination of inputs and fees that I know will lead=
 to it being stuck and expire. =A0<div>
<br></div><div>On the other hand, if such conditions are deterministic enou=
gh, it could be detected by the recipient and flagged.<div><br></div><div>I=
t&#39;s not a huge deal, but it&#39;s something to consider. =A0</div><div>
<br></div><div>-Alan</div><div><br><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Jeff Garzik <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:jgarzik@exmulti.com">jgarzik@exmulti.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<b=
r><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:=
1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Not sure whether this rises to the level of a BIP or not, as it is<br>
largely an implementation change.<br>
<br>
One of my From-Day-One complaints about bitcoin is that transactions<br>
behavior could be far more deterministic (predictable), from a user<br>
standpoint. =A0Transactions in the current system can easily remain in<br>
limbo forever.<br>
<br>
One big step in making transactions behave more predictably would be<br>
to remove transactions from the memory pool, if they have not made it<br>
into a block for a couple days. =A0i.e.<br>
<br>
1. =A0N =3D 1 or 2 or whatever the community prefers. =A0Ideally enough tim=
e<br>
for a third-tier miner, mining strange TXs, finds a block.<br>
2. =A0H1 =3D height of block chain, when a TX is received<br>
3. =A0H2 =3D H1 + (144 * N)<br>
4. =A0If block chain height reaches H2, and TX has not made it into a<br>
block, drop TX from memory pool<br>
<br>
Although this only impacts a small amount of TX&#39;s ultimately, what it<b=
r>
does do is give us the ability -- once miners have upgraded to this<br>
rule -- to tell bitcoin users that their transactions &quot;expire&quot; af=
ter N<br>
days.<br>
<br>
Backwards compatibility should not be an issue; clients are free to<br>
retransmit their TX at any time, as usual, thereby &quot;resetting the<br>
clock&quot; for all peers who have forgotten the TX in question.<br>
<br>
Once in place, clients may then implement code that notices a TX has<br>
expired (read: likely to have been forgotten by the network, assuming<br>
they themselves have stopped retransmitting it). =A0Then you can start<br>
working on wallet/coin recovery, perhaps resending with a higher fee<br>
etc.<br>
<br>
The above change is not really &quot;fill-or-kill&quot; but it should be a =
big<br>
step, opening the door to deterministic TX behavior.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Jeff Garzik<br>
exMULTI, Inc.<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:jgarzik@exmulti.com">jgarzik@exmulti.com</a><br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---<br>
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.<br>
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.<br>
Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!<br>
<a href=3D"http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2" target=3D"_blank">http://p.=
sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo=
pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de=
velopment</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>

--f46d043c093ec0d3d504bd803ce4--