Author: Rhavar 2018-01-23 16:31:36
Published on: 2018-01-23T16:31:36+00:00
The discussion revolves around allowing users to merge multiple unconfirmed transactions while stripping extraneous inputs and change as they go. However, the bip125 rule prohibits this by requiring that the replacement transaction pays an absolute fee of at least the sum paid by the original transactions. The proposed change would make it cheaper to evict low-fee transactions from other nodes' mempool, which could introduce DoS vectors. A compromise suggested is to require that the absolute fee must be greater than or equal to half the original fees. The "retroactive transaction merging" process is easy to implement but currently has muted benefits due to the higher absolute fee rule. The proposed change would allow legitimate and useful use of retroactive transaction merging without much downside. The discussion also explores possible solutions for tracking replaced transactions, such as only considering a transaction replaceable if it has change, but this opens up complexities. Most transactions have change, making it unclear under what circumstance they wouldn't.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T23:58:01.381010+00:00