Author: Luke Dashjr 2016-02-17 02:36:09
Published on: 2016-02-17T02:36:09+00:00
The Bitcoin Developer mailing list discussed the "feefilter" message and its definition as a message containing an int64_t, which raised questions about extensibility. The use of different feerate definition versions was suggested to avoid the need for a new protocol extension for every new policy. Luke Dashjr questioned the usefulness of the message for wallets due to the fact that transactions would only be relayed if they passed both the fee filter and a bloom filter. However, Alex Morcos clarified that sending feefilter messages should not reduce the number of transactions accepted into the mempool. The discussion also highlighted the issue of privacy concerns with light clients using bloom filters.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T04:03:19.562567+00:00