Author: Greg Sanders 2022-10-31 16:25:46
Published on: 2022-10-31T16:25:46+00:00
In a recent discussion on bitcoin-dev, the topic of full replace-by-fee (RBF) was explored. While some initially supported full RBF as an eventual outcome, many have since changed their opinion. The consensus is that the current BIP 125 policy should be maintained, which allows users to opt-in to RBF, and that the -mempoolfullrbf flag should be removed from Bitcoin Core's latest release candidate. The main argument against full RBF is that it takes away user choice to opt a transaction into a non-replacement policy regime, which some users still prefer. Additionally, there are concerns about how full RBF would affect zeroconf services and multiparty protocols. While full RBF may not solve the issues raised by Antoine Riard regarding interfering with multi-party funded transactions, it does not seem to present any fundamental issues either. Ultimately, there is no clear solution, and developers need to balance user choice with network safety and functionality.Suhas Daftuar responded to Pieter Wuille's proposal to make full-RBF the default policy on the Bitcoin network. Daftuar expressed concern about the complexities around transaction chains and pinning in the RBF case compared to the non-RBF case. They suggested that adding non-interfering use cases to what the network supports should be explored instead. Daftuar argued against making full-RBF the default policy, stating that it could subvert the use case for v3 transactions, which are restricted in the ways their outputs can be spent while unconfirmed. They also questioned the enforceability of BIP 125's RBF rules on all transactions and whether there are any benefits to full-RBF other than breaking zeroconf business practices. Daftuar suggested that the philosophy of transaction relay policy in Bitcoin Core should be to support disparate use cases in order to try to make everything work better, rather than break things prematurely because we guess others will break them eventually anyway. They concluded by asking those in favor of full-RBF to consider the questions raised in their email.
Updated on: 2023-06-16T02:25:11.507403+00:00