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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1WILZr-0000Jw-5b
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:13:55 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.149.75 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.149.75; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail149075.authsmtp.net;
Received: from outmail149075.authsmtp.net ([62.13.149.75])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WILZp-000055-F8 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:13:55 +0000
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
by punt14.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s1PHDlso008634;
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:13:47 GMT
Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id s1PHDhSf034705
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:13:45 GMT
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:13:34 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Message-ID: <20140225171334.GA30819@savin>
References: <20140225044116.GA28050@savin>
<f35865264f37315d580a30dc49789a5a.squirrel@fulvetta.riseup.net>
<CANEZrP1wB9zpnD+DOnmCNycEGB+nZMt8gQrjpn5V92MMkausaA@mail.gmail.com>
<20140225144922.GA25549@savin>
<CANEZrP0pDjHr3v2w_zKnME+6GjVdvV5HYjrLH7xthbNdBniK4g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VbJkn9YxBvnuCH5J"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP0pDjHr3v2w_zKnME+6GjVdvV5HYjrLH7xthbNdBniK4g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 2f7d8b7c-9e40-11e3-94fa-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdAcUHlAWAgsB AmIbWlNeUV57XWU7 bAxPbAVDY01GQQRq
WVdMSlVNFUsrAHx5 ckZ9BBlxcwJGfTBx YEJqXj5ZCkMufRR6
EVNdQGkGeGZhPWMC WUQOJh5UcAFPdx8U a1N6AHBDAzANdhES
HhM4ODE3eDlSNilR RRkIIFQOdA4lEzN0 SwoFBV0A
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1WILZp-000055-F8
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fee drop
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:13:55 -0000
--VbJkn9YxBvnuCH5J
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:25:58PM +0530, Mike Hearn wrote:
Well, I've done my responsible disclosure, and I've got better things to
do than argue with wishful thinking.
> There are two possibilities.
>=20
> One is that the value of transactions with the new lower fee is outweighed
> by increased orphan costs and miners refuse to include them en-masse.
> Wallet authors lose the staring match and go back to setting higher fees
> until such a time as block propagation is optimised and the orphan costs =
go
> down. Nodes that are encountering memory pressure can increase their min
> relay fee locally until their usage fits inside their resources. It's
> annoying to do this by hand but by no means infeasible.
>=20
> The other is that the total value of transactions even with the lower fee
> is not outweighed by orphan costs. The value of a transaction is higher
> than its simple monetary value - the fact that Bitcoin is useful, growing
> and considered cheap also has a value which is impossible to calculate, b=
ut
> we know it's there (because Bitcoin does not exist in a vacuum and has
> competitors). In this case miners stop including lots of useful
> transactions that represent desired economic activity and are put under
> pressure by the community to change their policies. If all miners do this
> and making small blocks is considered errant behaviour, then we're back to
> the same situation we're in today.
>=20
> The possibility you're worried about - that someone does a DoS attack by
> flooding the network with small transactions - is only an issue in the
> first situation, and it is by no means the easiest or cheapest way to DoS
> Bitcoin. We all want to see more DoS resistance but basically any change =
to
> Bitcoin can be objected to on anti-DoS grounds at the moment, and this wi=
ll
> remain the case until someone steps up to spend significant time on
> resource scheduling and code audits.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000445db8e568846d542c86ab395137b32b2a05577afcc7c6a3
--VbJkn9YxBvnuCH5J
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)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==
=ztKd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--VbJkn9YxBvnuCH5J--
|
