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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 347A6C001A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 21 Aug 2021 03:11:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169B76066F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 21 Aug 2021 03:11:00 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.202 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,
FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
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 Wy6Z0En9t45K
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 21 Aug 2021 03:10:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40141.protonmail.ch (mail-40141.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.141])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCE8560664
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 21 Aug 2021 03:10:55 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 03:10:46 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail; t=1629515453;
bh=I7caONd0c44mXayebSiilrdogIBmqIcQjup2MEgOy5s=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=j53boROyX+H1PBCWa3WfcU/JzgjB8CfW0/GLCfpGkbn5U81xxKl4r3GB+T4lNz3XD
r7gGTR4+l+D8yv1pC4orU+FFftNeiUzRZy0ng1dum6U0SXJUoMKiFbAy4K0woSPSyX
vKYo1A3Ff7LAiKWoZzxiTf2S2Urkot6moC5oNvWU=
To: Jeremy <jlrubin@mit.edu>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <50s2eg2qZ_BSHhI1mT_mHP7fkDQ8EXnakOb9NmDfZlx_hN44l37UmopfAr2V4ws4yhx0YihNYBIOelJ01vhITI8K4G1UgmobTwf9FyJq_Yo=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5xwhiEDa2KjF265iDZ1ism4AFzh3S3D4cJSESVVKNwv9L7zA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD5xwhjFBjvkMKev_6HFRuRGcZUi7WjO5d963GNXWN4n-06Pqg@mail.gmail.com>
<CALZpt+F9FScaLsvXUozdBL4Ss8r71-gtUS_Fh9i53cK_rSGBeA@mail.gmail.com>
<20210810061441.6rg3quotiycomcp6@ganymede>
<CALZpt+G0CRitWLwUTA+7NnnZWNNrsEmFTMW3VmFSQ=vzXZOQGA@mail.gmail.com>
<20210812220339.GA3416@erisian.com.au>
<CAD5xwhiEDa2KjF265iDZ1ism4AFzh3S3D4cJSESVVKNwv9L7zA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
lightning-dev <lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] Removing the Dust Limit
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: Sat, 21 Aug 2021 03:11:00 -0000
Good morning Jeremy,
> one interesting point that came up at the bitdevs in austin today that fa=
vors remove that i believe is new to this discussion (it was new to me):
>
> the argument can be reduced to:
>
> - dust limit is a per-node relay policy.
> - it is rational for miners to mine dust outputs given their cost of main=
tenance=C2=A0(storing the output potentially forever) is lower than their i=
mmediate reward in fees.
> - if txn relaying nodes censor something that a miner would mine, users w=
ill seek a private/direct relay to the miner and vice versa.
> - if direct relay to miner becomes popular, it is both bad for privacy an=
d decentralization.
> - therefore the dust limit, should there be demand to create dust at prev=
ailing mempool feerates, causes an incentive to increase network centraliza=
tion=C2=A0(immediately)
>
> the tradeoff is if a short term immediate incentive to promote network ce=
ntralization is better or worse than a long term node operator overhead.
Against the above, we should note that in the Lightning spec, when an outpu=
t *would have been* created that is less than the dust limit, the output is=
instead put into fees.
https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc/blob/master/03-transactio=
ns.md#trimmed-outputs
Thus, the existence of a dust limit encourages L2 protocols to have similar=
rules, where outputs below the dust limit are just given over as fees to m=
iners, so the existence of a dust limit might very well be incentivize-comp=
atible for miners, regardless of centralization effects or not.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
