Author: Peter Todd 2015-02-12 07:45:09
Published on: 2015-02-12T07:45:09+00:00
In an email thread from 2015, Tamas Blummer expressed concern about the replace-by-fee (RBF) patch, stating that proprietary software assumed double spends would not be relayed by the core. To remain useful as a border router, Blummer suggested that the RBF patched core should only relay double spend if it replaces an earlier transaction. In response, Peter Todd argued that nothing in the RBF patch was consensus critical and that the objection was a result of the poor modularity of the Bitcoin Core codebase. Todd explained that dealing with double-spends and keeping mempools synced was trivial, involving removing conflicting transactions and adding the new one. Todd also noted that the complexity of RBF was in deciding when one transaction should replace another and that the code was otherwise simple and similar to block handling logic.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T16:49:13.866713+00:00