Author: Daniel Lipshitz 2022-12-11 20:24:00
Published on: 2022-12-11T20:24:00+00:00
The current use case of 0-Conf acceptance of transactions is significant, and merchants and service providers are aware of the associated risks. However, full RBF adoption would likely make 0-conf not possible and limit this use case. The primary motivation for full RBF is to increase fees and enable faster acceptance in the block if required. To enable full RBF adoption without impeding the 0-conf use case, the primary use case of full RBF (increasing fees) can be enabled while keeping the outputs of TRX1 to be included within TRX2. TRX1 is the trx first published and held in Mempool, and TRX2 is the trx which comes to replace TRX1. For TRX2 to replace TRX1 in the Mempool, outputs must be the same or include outputs of TRX1, and both cases require the addition of at least one input to increase the fee. This rule enables increasing network fees post-publication of trx without losing the 0-conf use case. OptinRBF and FullRBF (with the above limitation) would give actors full access to increasing fees as an option. The risks associated with 0-conf are well understood in the market, and it can continue to exist as is, with the ongoing choices available to actors.
Updated on: 2023-05-22T23:05:46.176597+00:00