Author: Rusty Russell 2018-10-23 10:43:26
Published on: 2018-10-23T10:43:26+00:00
In a discussion about the use of Child Pays for Parent (CPFP) in Bitcoin transactions, Jim Posen suggests that instead of leaving an extra output for CPFP, inputs can be signed with ANYONECANPAY and the sender can create an exact output for the fees input. However, this approach would change the transaction ID that the Hashed Time-Locked Contract (HTLC) transactions rely on. In response to another suggestion regarding symmetric delays in commitment transactions, Rusty Russell argues that the delays need not be the same for both parties, but they should be applied equally regardless of who publishes the commitment transaction. He explains that taking the max delay avoids game theory issues where one party has a shorter delay than the other, leading to unfairness and potential coercion.
Updated on: 2023-05-25T14:29:25.268253+00:00