path: root/a1/3f1e19b2ab982046050899e6b6772c83822dbd

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 CA12D104E
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jan 2018 23:48:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pf0-f181.google.com (mail-pf0-f181.google.com
	[209.85.192.181])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7122AE2
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jan 2018 23:48:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pf0-f181.google.com with SMTP id 23so2148886pfp.3
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 27 Jan 2018 15:48:11 -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=v5CXSSK+r9cqLP8y5wwLOhzdcn+7tAymhg6ezY6q+QU=;
	b=YUNlqGqVfgk10gSkxAZxdLJyqFi51a40OkPj6lya+3OAjcV6ghaECmP4Q+dcA0GNNP
	55xlSID5bPUxt7StWdsFiW+7DERSMjjViCID2nrQcpERszTSqUpwwvsVblRlLvWBuOiS
	wo5VZ2/Q1hgXciq1ypOQvrJCyKUCWe5x7fXFv3G9eUr4g5btpogD4OT1K7WvViHwK5co
	bPIit2mGBZ5JcmqXN9fgX7YXMgCjGYNhYAjz79N1KimwKLpf/QHu6GmTdYuahohSvMFJ
	hDudD8ZK8+/0/pM8lmg+JzWwXtxUteghkbQ0HcstbyINoprbhQ+YjQMho2dXu6tw9PiN
	WQbg==
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=v5CXSSK+r9cqLP8y5wwLOhzdcn+7tAymhg6ezY6q+QU=;
	b=mftSNt1ZjkoTTHHKLodZXYppHUSuNSzHu8mgfrR8HhnOQWbwhUS1SWcLyx4o+Gh3/Q
	Dr9xxI5rgz+niL34nul2V1Qj5OvYli28WUbsF8zgQRJ/Fr6i1g+ZpIOKXpEfV04uIVzn
	dD4B75nDBQHai3a8CYRcEviIop0Tz8l9ukCrbUM/w9o1QiaaQC8M1dd72UiyjiE/2Txw
	7nG3YBLbVXAWOKjkUzjZQtgF8gmcaxhsZAibgHI2ZW36tF8ryJPj5J/3c5Df5acLrPFC
	C0ReypOyT3mCFfDlwz1p6wIzEMUIQ1r8ZTOXjmyoiy15llF4/NKCNLBNGpyocZ0Wwtv9
	9Sqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytcYNEcco6x1iC0+4dVHcFzJ1963RlictuM+qO3l7ag0jBWHPw5W
	YBKsI73WUkoqsUa8nkdNlIqtmw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225jPSfzQ66ZIoZxmWLwcXe0lHq9mqji8M8N/HlP2UK/1fvWbcilIfh4Ut5kWmvW1tGtJz7yBg==
X-Received: by 10.98.85.195 with SMTP id j186mr18338877pfb.77.1517096890889;
	Sat, 27 Jan 2018 15:48:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:a080:16bb:a48b:b60d:c18b:69c2?
	([2601:600:a080:16bb:a48b:b60d:c18b:69c2])
	by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
	p68sm22836150pfp.30.2018.01.27.15.48.09
	(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
	Sat, 27 Jan 2018 15:48:09 -0800 (PST)
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Nathan Parker <icesby24@gmail.com>
References: <CAPzrG5bFTbRERHQsmyFeZwiuakgSW5UCC8EtYfAm4j9EDtcLeg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgSzx_beEQqPOdoRJRVMSk0JNT6LGk0fHTktVSCU7sH1cA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
Message-ID: <65742e8e-ee27-40b9-f8ad-37f22916002d@voskuil.org>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 15:48:10 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSzx_beEQqPOdoRJRVMSk0JNT6LGk0fHTktVSCU7sH1cA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="fiqWjqOvRd381ocrCc3u6cqi6DEzeZt0W"
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: Sun, 28 Jan 2018 00:11:23 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: rewarding fees to next block miner
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: Sat, 27 Jan 2018 23:48:12 -0000

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--fiqWjqOvRd381ocrCc3u6cqi6DEzeZt0W
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="rsndbNS3Bhsv5UUjZbwcYWxbnMmM0TXr9";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Nathan Parker <icesby24@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <65742e8e-ee27-40b9-f8ad-37f22916002d@voskuil.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: rewarding fees to next block miner
References: <CAPzrG5bFTbRERHQsmyFeZwiuakgSW5UCC8EtYfAm4j9EDtcLeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAS2fgSzx_beEQqPOdoRJRVMSk0JNT6LGk0fHTktVSCU7sH1cA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgSzx_beEQqPOdoRJRVMSk0JNT6LGk0fHTktVSCU7sH1cA@mail.gmail.com>

--rsndbNS3Bhsv5UUjZbwcYWxbnMmM0TXr9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The OP premise is flawed:

https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/wiki/Fee-Recovery-Fallacy

as is the idea that side fees are incentive incompatible:

https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/wiki/Side-Fee-Fallacy

e

On 01/27/2018 11:06 AM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Not incentive compatible. Miners would prefer to include transactions
> paying fees via alternative mechanisms (anyone can spend outputs,
> direct pay to miner outputs, or completely out of band), if they even
> paid attention to internal fees at all they would give a lot more
> weight to direct payment fees. Users would accordingly pay much lower
> fees if they used these alternatives instead of directly, so the
> equlibrium state is almost everyone bypassing.   Bypass fee mechenisms
> have been supported by miners since 2011 too, so it isn't just
> conjecture.
>=20
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 8:45 AM, Nathan Parker via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> Miners can fill their blocks with transactions paying very high fees a=
t no
>> cost because they get the fees back to themselves. They can do this fo=
r
>> different purposes, like trying to increase the recommended fee. Here =
I
>> propose a backwards-compatible solution to this problem.
>>
>> The solution would be to reward the fees of the current block to the m=
iner
>> of the next block (or X blocks after the current one). That way, if a =
miner
>> floods its own block with very high fee transactions, those fees are n=
o
>> longer given back to itself, but to the miner of future blocks which c=
ould
>> potentially be anyone. Flooding blocks with fake txs is now discourage=
d.
>> However, filling blocks with real transactions paying real fees is sti=
ll
>> encouraged because you could be the one to mine the block that would c=
laim
>> this reward.
>>
>> The way to implement this in a backwards-compatible fashion would be t=
o
>> enforce miners to set an anyone-can-spend output in the coinbase trans=
action
>> of the block (by adding this as a rule for verifying new blocks). The =
miner
>> of 100 blocks after the current one can add a secondary transaction sp=
ending
>> this block's anyone-can-spend coinbase transaction (due to the coinbas=
e
>> needing 100 blocks to mature) and thus claiming the funds. This way, t=
he
>> block reward of a block X is always transferred to the miner of block =
X+100.
>>
>> Implementing this would require a soft-fork. Since that secondary
>> transaction needs no signature whatsoever, the overhead caused by that=
 extra
>> transaction is negligible.
>>
>> Possible Downside: When the fork is activated, the miners won=E2=80=99=
t get any
>> reward for mining blocks for a period of 100 blocks. They could choose=
 to
>> power off the mining equipment for maintenance or to save power over t=
hat
>> period, so the hashrate could drop temporarily. However, if the hashra=
te
>> drops too much, blocks would take much longer to mine, and miners woul=
dn=E2=80=99t
>> want that either since they want to go through those 100 reward-less b=
locks
>> as soon as possible so they can start getting rewards from mining agai=
n.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>=20


--rsndbNS3Bhsv5UUjZbwcYWxbnMmM0TXr9--

--fiqWjqOvRd381ocrCc3u6cqi6DEzeZt0W
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)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJabQ+6AAoJEDzYwH8LXOFO0iIH/3vXCstKi2fFG57zQtnkM+3b
qmFnDthoSEZNa2d4OqjPCsBbVVJDJfcWqvxnbwOORAJ7znKBFJNF2P/IoX9mUxQp
iba7CJL5E7DfYL/bsrfMetjQEi79acEFCYOwEu9X3kLbfdzcRKq68TVScEeLEKX8
MyQpQ4+F4uKRiJvNLjKozt7ovz88weU4OFtB0u5QTLhX9dNHdLsXZn/NdK+lBMA/
bp1xVdfucxjwme9AApGeut9Nt8840iVAWo10S+e7Nka5+YulCFIE2/RS91Ewyrp+
tLjEm1SJKPr88Algq6chtOe8dw4oiTtkLL1dXv0V0JcBeTqzXfw90jEsvjEyj8A=
=hHzi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--fiqWjqOvRd381ocrCc3u6cqi6DEzeZt0W--