summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>2017-09-29 08:22:14 -0700
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2017-09-29 15:22:18 +0000
commitbe1cc445af34bf7e73db6eac2cc59a17976d75db (patch)
tree10e01206106dac0c1389b8f70b09116e3465bb28
parent9c0673eac68558d351e521600b2e4772da30d486 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-be1cc445af34bf7e73db6eac2cc59a17976d75db.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-be1cc445af34bf7e73db6eac2cc59a17976d75db.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Rebatable fees & incentive-safe fee markets
Diffstat
-rw-r--r--86/e9eec6ccc0baaaad1d909ad71a4b39e44b81b5111
1 files changed, 111 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/86/e9eec6ccc0baaaad1d909ad71a4b39e44b81b5 b/86/e9eec6ccc0baaaad1d909ad71a4b39e44b81b5
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..835e4f00a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/86/e9eec6ccc0baaaad1d909ad71a4b39e44b81b5
@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+Return-Path: <mark@friedenbach.org>
+Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+ [172.17.192.35])
+ by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63B0BAB6
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:22:18 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
+Received: from mail-pf0-f173.google.com (mail-pf0-f173.google.com
+ [209.85.192.173])
+ by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB33C467
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:22:16 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: by mail-pf0-f173.google.com with SMTP id y29so903453pff.0
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:16 -0700 (PDT)
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
+ d=friedenbach-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
+ h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
+ :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
+ bh=C5bf392EmKv1ZosA891C/batIVt5mWTsFNyZTTFXVSY=;
+ b=iCLJYTh3cTkj4y8488bz+S1q4JDvODh9l6T3OI8nzyrO8OTIOVbqVhBsAn/jCT6X5T
+ n1ei5rz6vZdY3HM2uFgax43X9ep5maY/r5VY7X53gygRyalbVSk5qMAAIvIaWMs8fxnw
+ gMlVsDzYGPvLX16O0cQN7HTp90ojyFEadRvVUxg1fYWiNuH9FQDWW4V6FevN4CqDDqEV
+ Yat0gaYfEMZw56hfla8s1q+Kzfg1c9tqS5Zspw9CAiaqZv98HBLH+9Bam7QQRUAm8VTW
+ Xvhf5MGHKR+CewUiiABJJY3UQvjJ9MntrOuRnfUrw8zOfbv738AhRBH3wE0r8Z20ei+n
+ ty6w==
+X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
+ d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
+ h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
+ :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
+ bh=C5bf392EmKv1ZosA891C/batIVt5mWTsFNyZTTFXVSY=;
+ b=JxQyTVoyBArrswsZluqqqymsX3TBCVcFfDEGi+IgtOeaZhQFL0INu56s38IRt+4azg
+ BaQ5W7doIaAXzHLXQwMLWq3mMNcdydmeo/MadV7sbZfzBYIkrAJ5q/EoBaq46zi158xx
+ mJBiV3Hy10ft3gy6e7KfRmMz3imLZNIYN6NhLlvjH1RKAFI+7j+QP+V8FQajDvgBt2ax
+ IKH7BBmKk9ca5WXRvT3fG41yejISaltfDPSq1uS1BzJrOv7vk7Fl7vKBoY8bEwcR5zS/
+ OavsIdkhKjyNkDm3UYH3VZWR1Ju0sCWeoXMACiOdveV2m/Ul0TJW6EyavNx+86b/Smw/
+ 2goQ==
+X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjITTl3161O2PUH2VvpVeF/n0QvuYzChMaSketxiZsYJDVGLTHQ
+ 0XMSu1iFKC4fBByHgVfsNHme9N54yBw=
+X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAVNzpy9Ofc7sBpu9ZfYwbMVCQaj5siU/5UYreSF+lEzyDOgsX0Ax8h0o1kR8jjVWClzSmtgw==
+X-Received: by 10.84.218.198 with SMTP id g6mr7317854plm.23.1506698536170;
+ Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:16 -0700 (PDT)
+Received: from ?IPv6:2601:646:8080:1291:e45d:dd5d:7212:1e7c?
+ ([2601:646:8080:1291:e45d:dd5d:7212:1e7c])
+ by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
+ y16sm6835943pfe.68.2017.09.29.08.22.14
+ (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
+ Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
+Content-Type: text/plain;
+ charset=us-ascii
+Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
+From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
+X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15A402)
+In-Reply-To: <CAEgR2PGrf+4pQRyNC_xKVEKXimKTWveGK9q6YJeZkG0_r=8tkg@mail.gmail.com>
+Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:22:14 -0700
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+Message-Id: <5F7A4F74-B108-4E30-A3F4-4125BBD0F819@friedenbach.org>
+References: <CAEgR2PGCZ=F85yjAbZgC6NtzhpdgBL3n4M2jowN12wJ7x-Ai1A@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PGrxDQE0k8WX4XXz9GN-RAL6JB51ST9Hdz=ba36gRCa6A@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PFjt=ihzRBhNXbHTAJz1R+3vz8o-zRZkDA3iBo39x9cTQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PFfSjJjkTYq+DAmTzmkHPxqhn6fUDoXTzrRebz+OoUgqw@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PG5ZueHKDXbsPDEjQG7xAYBa_JAtPZo9n1V2=STC1srpA@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PGPQ1e9SmoWOS3V+N9v+OWiM4g3nPN3d9urc+DfkWEJ7A@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PEKkHH6+Sh8cQGF83-s1tpwQZgd0fiuNz_xyWu0mUPfCA@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PEyWFO1RFohVEpcb-M7aM-8xjCFvDPeJPD4zF4yTCyZ0A@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAEgR2PGrf+4pQRyNC_xKVEKXimKTWveGK9q6YJeZkG0_r=8tkg@mail.gmail.com>
+To: Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com>
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
+ MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
+X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
+ smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:23:36 +0000
+Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Rebatable fees & incentive-safe fee markets
+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: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 15:22:18 -0000
+
+This is correct. Under assumptions of a continuous mempool model however thi=
+s should be considered the outlier behavior, other than a little bit of empt=
+y space at the end, now and then. A maximum fee rate calculated as a filter o=
+ver past block rates could constrain this outlier behavior from ever happeni=
+ng too.
+
+> On Sep 29, 2017, at 3:43 AM, Daniele Pinna <daniele.pinna@gmail.com> wrote=
+:
+>=20
+> Maybe I'm getting this wrong but wouldn't this scheme imply that a miner i=
+s incentivized to limit the amount of transactions in a block to capture the=
+ maximum fee of the ones included?
+>=20
+> As an example, mined blocks currently carry ~0.8 btc in fees right now. If=
+ I were to submit a transaction paying 1 btc in maximal money fees, then the=
+ miner would be incentivized to include my transaction alone to avoid that l=
+ower fee paying transactions reduce the amount of fees he can earn from my t=
+ransaction alone. This would mean that I could literally clog the network by=
+ paying 1btc every ten minutes.
+>=20
+> Am I missing something?
+>=20
+> Daniele=20
+
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.39.1) at 2025-05-04 20:41:54 +0000