Author: Peter Todd 2015-05-27 07:47:13
Published on: 2015-05-27T07:47:13+00:00
In a discussion on the Bitcoin development mailing list, Mark Friedenbach explains that sequence numbers were originally intended for use in multi-party transaction construction such as micropayment channels. Participants could sign successive versions of a transaction, incrementing the sequence field each time to allow relay nodes to perform transaction replacement according to some policy rule making use of the sequence numbers. A worked example was requested to demonstrate how this would work in practice. It is argued that there is no reason to have pending transactions in mempools until they are expected to be mined and this proposal is no more "consensus enforcement" than simply increasing the fee for each replacement would be. The need to increase fees for each mempool replacement is seen as an anti-DoS measure.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T21:39:10.938379+00:00