Author: Kaz Wesley 2014-08-01 01:37:45
Published on: 2014-08-01T01:37:45+00:00
Peter Todd, a Bitcoin developer, expressed concern about changing the semantics of nLockTime, stating that it could harm existing and future applications using nLockTime for refund transactions. In response, another developer suggested that most uses of nLockTime would remain compatible and that perpetuating unconfirmed transactions in mempools was undesirable. The discussion continued with the suggestion of implementing transaction expiration rules, whereby transactions would stop being relayed and drop out of mempools after a fixed number of blocks from their creation. This rule would not be unanimous but most of the network could follow these rules. It was acknowledged that someone could still circumvent this rule by submitting "expired" transactions directly to miners with suitable policies. However, none of the benefits of transaction expiration rely on the expiration being final, and any possible downsides of expiration are largely mitigated by the option still being available to get expired transactions mined.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T01:42:12.106483+00:00