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
|
Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A05F0C96
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 12:03:33 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pg0-f41.google.com (mail-pg0-f41.google.com [74.125.83.41])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 178B01B4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 12:03:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id g7so2912667pgs.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 04:03:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version
:in-reply-to; bh=M+H86AsoLACQYYNdzZPhFZH+gBptdaooYNe3nZJtttM=;
b=Nihxw13gBrTuc4ThCD93e+KvC9rCIK24LVT1882XdiBmEzlVepMo+/fHh+Xk/sJWqg
FhV793N1mZvaaZB70UyNullRSfTXYN+c8ThtdNMFou9aQFABTNyswJIKGYv9lWiLd/k5
GG4K97N7Fw7B1QyO7Yti8e6TWklNxfsjE9YlMS9APc4Ay1A6pHXMgOjNVDiYd/LuRk/t
tWRsAwzVGksQqTczJDiPHrNz4YfkUQuprJ67xb5J/NjajXTnvuRnzfnvNQIaGRB2JKaj
p7k/sPqeeiaAqGIm8ftVHAcloTbpgJUlOiHqo4xdP7NWJb7Nz/k5HQ2e7KN5aH8ml+qc
8Hxg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to;
bh=M+H86AsoLACQYYNdzZPhFZH+gBptdaooYNe3nZJtttM=;
b=RqRz3qDORJ9dGSrrlqcgMIgReF918MEJW22zIT5o7qhJEF1X+EXnAEDR++qlEXcWS4
L0BKyUKMyqlgtt0iHTi4yrHxUKkto9mWxEfr6OqViIGkuhQFLnUBbG8e/u7WnKx+c9tS
C0ZjhUnjPCla33CS27eO/kJqjetiFzoyy3lQceDSAd4sFTyCQG2S+HplNUOjCpxpOgyl
T6IlpAEd7CM/dpKEmTFQJbhH3Qc9o1IUWuYiVt8vKlox9hfMVwYShtl84BVtqPVT5adW
3p2gCkNatpmrORmVg0/1uNUuBqUBlFaCPdJ0K90lSOwGoHHb6T2XLx7HDN+T1zd3/6UI
6P9w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7Wl/qEuDGTlD3ANhggV1PGgHiDPRUkdmagr1mYhIA8sOJvXlWe
C26QRGtAs8Z2LzYVZsNjHX0kmQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbXGXbc3s0GNggZxfMZZCfJQFa3xHygrCSvn8QznKfJSJUUWhcd3TJmkW9nQEc8GWSZTG3w/Q==
X-Received: by 10.98.74.148 with SMTP id c20mr6404614pfj.200.1512043412612;
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 04:03:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:a080:16bb:b8e3:428d:2590:7530?
([2601:600:a080:16bb:b8e3:428d:2590:7530])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
n129sm7462146pfn.1.2017.11.30.04.03.31
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Thu, 30 Nov 2017 04:03:31 -0800 (PST)
To: William Morriss <wjmelements@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Ben Kloester <benkloester@gmail.com>
References: <CADpM8jr_RrbPXLx6Up8HMW-fv=noFLjy817dfsFdYTg216Pu7w@mail.gmail.com>
<CANgJ=T8ZHbC4R3Rs5kZG8HfGs8810jj01WN4Ssiketej0md4kA@mail.gmail.com>
<CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
Message-ID: <61fa604f-29c8-c1f2-fc49-45a5e8263bfa@voskuil.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 04:03:30 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
boundary="TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 15:01:45 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Idea: Marginal Pricing
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 12:03:33 -0000
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="WCw8OJRlaHX03xNv5DE4v1rQCddi5uQIB";
protected-headers="v1"
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
To: William Morriss <wjmelements@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Ben Kloester <benkloester@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <61fa604f-29c8-c1f2-fc49-45a5e8263bfa@voskuil.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Idea: Marginal Pricing
References: <CADpM8jr_RrbPXLx6Up8HMW-fv=noFLjy817dfsFdYTg216Pu7w@mail.gmail.com>
<CANgJ=T8ZHbC4R3Rs5kZG8HfGs8810jj01WN4Ssiketej0md4kA@mail.gmail.com>
<CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADpM8jq_-JxCmLiCPMG2ZVuYxZH7KOCyyMaQnBay18PQLPvmRg@mail.gmail.com>
--WCw8OJRlaHX03xNv5DE4v1rQCddi5uQIB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 11/29/2017 10:13 PM, William Morriss via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Ben Kloester <benkloester@gmail.com
> <mailto:benkloester@gmail.com>> wrote:
>=20
> Something similar to this has been proposed in this article by Ron=
> Lavi, Or Sattath, and Aviv Zohar, and discussed in this bitcoin-dev=
> thread https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017=
-September/015093.html
>=20
> They only discussed changing the fee structure, not removing the
> block size limit, as far as I know.
>=20
> "Redesigning Bitcoin's fee market"
> https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08881 <https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08=
881>
>=20
> *Ben Kloester*
>=20
> Thanks. Marginal pricing is equivalent to the "Monopolistic Price
> Mechanism" discussed in https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08881
> The mechanism is the same, including
> the block size adjustment, but as you noted the prior discussion only
> concerns the fee structure.
>=20
> It looks like the prior proposal broke down because of Peter Todd's
> concern with out-of-band payments
> (https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-September=
/015103.html).
> Restated, miners can circumvent the system through out of band payments=
=2E
> Mark Friedenbach argues that out-of-band payments are penalized in part=
> because the end-user could have just as easily bid higher instead of
> paying OOB. Peter Todd argues that a miner could mine only out-of-band
> transactions. Such transactions could have no on-chain fees and thus be=
> disregarded by other miners.
>=20
> I believe this OOB scenario is imaginary. Either it would be more
> profitable for a miner to mine fairly, or cheaper for the end-user to
> pay the fee in-band.=20
> Consider MINFEE to the the effective fee paid for
> the block mined by the OOB-incentivized miner. Consider MARKFEE to the
> the market fee collected by non-OOB-incentivized miners. Call the OOB
> effective tx fee OOB. Then,
> For a user to prefer OOB: MINFEE+OOB<MARKFEE
> For a miner to prefer OOB: MINFEE+OOB>MARKFEE
> It is impossible for both scenarios to be true. As previously argued by=
> Mark Friedenbach, the system disincentivizes OOB tx fees.
Bitcoin is neutral on how miners are paid. The benefit of on-chain fee
payment is that a fee can be paid with no communication between the
miner and the merchant, preserving anonymity. It also serves as a
convenience that anonymous fees are published, as it provides a basis
for anonymous fee estimation. There is no centralization pressure that
arises from side fees.
https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/wiki/Side-Fee-Fallacy
> I don't think there is any more centralization pressure with marginal
> fees than before. What prevents miners from colluding to move tx fees
> OOB is the value of the on-band pending tx fees. The hashpower of
> individual miners is not impressive compared to the entire network, so
> individual miners could not offer a service to speed up confirmation
> that would be superior to simply doing a RBP. OOB fees are perhaps a
> symptom of the current setup, wherein there is no penalty for
> arbitrarily favoring individual transactions with lower fees.
--WCw8OJRlaHX03xNv5DE4v1rQCddi5uQIB--
--TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJaH/OSAAoJEDzYwH8LXOFOR0sH/iOianu1Pz+BFrkYOZRNxE/e
FmYVKZnhwgI4WgGrfxeH0/Qb807NwMqgUmNkl1CFvNuNoJ+cj7UAdyMnh5rS6rVI
mPNR42q69QKpaqY2EJDOrzDYFP3KJ7kPc2Z6l860Eb77aLnHRUh4ZlygCZYSL9fX
fJd/hhHQAfYEOihmhjwLWDSRWsisFX6nm4QKxzZ4ku5T03nFKKNPlImjoEGLiuSj
ddnjIyzrzlQX9mgiVidv4uP4m9ViSuJgwIcadhjncj0EfAVOWt7DksTV94C6QGiU
PtD+NmPHLEPGEPdnK4rD9yuYlTExu6SgQjqUiOWkKUuwRkTAWXH6WUAndkUB0us=
=dpRS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--TS74TNVEcUkuoLWgOjWLodiHqiGvxSRKM--
|
