blob: f159a552adedf910c79c0763894d8b6e4d1e2cea (
plain)
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
|
Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1BF4BDC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 10 Jul 2015 21:11:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97DE81B2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 10 Jul 2015 21:11:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:61b6:56a6:b03d:28d6])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9288D1080408;
Fri, 10 Jul 2015 21:10:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Hashcash: 1:25:150710:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::i+JoyVEFsFbcinxN:cCP9K
X-Hashcash: 1:25:150710:tier.nolan@gmail.com::wQm7udmbgYf=62XE:byZK
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 21:10:32 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.1.1-gentoo-r1; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; )
References: <6D3AACE5-D6CD-4785-8A55-F6DF0B94D927@ricmoo.com>
<CAPWm=eWH9rZpwJeK2tTdHH8+BWDU_Vam8oBtG0u49v2yZuYVfw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAE-z3OWMpCW51FjwT8409k_10Uj9Zq=H8AVUo5B6PfYBTQ_Axg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAE-z3OWMpCW51FjwT8409k_10Uj9Zq=H8AVUo5B6PfYBTQ_Axg@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201507102110.33706.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why not Child-Pays-For-Parent?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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, 10 Jul 2015 21:11:21 -0000
AFAIK the only thing holding it up is lack of unit tests. If anyone would like
to implement those, I expect it'd be merged fairly soon. Then the problem is,
as Jeff mentioned, getting the parent transactions relayed despite failing
relay policy on their own.
Luke
|
