Erik Aronesty [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2022-12-14 📝 Original message:NACK support for 0-conf is ...

📅 Original date posted:2022-12-14
📝 Original message:NACK

support for 0-conf is harmful for reasons already stated ad nauseum



On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 4:58 AM Daniel Lipshitz via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> A 0-conf double spend caused by FSS-RBF would be harmless since the
> original output (address and amounts) remain in the double spending trx.
>
> So all a merchant would need to do is monitor block inclusion for the
> relevant output. Addition of some wallet logic would resolve it easily.
>
> Technically the only difference is that a FSS-RBF requires an additional
> input trx to be included in the second trx.
>
> Not clear to me, why the limitation of adding an additional input hinders
> the added value of FullRBF and how significant that hinderance is.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 at 11:59 John Carvalho <john at synonym.to> wrote:
>
>> Why wasn't this solution put in place back then? Are there problems with
>> the design?
>>
>> While I still think there are unhealthy side-effects of Full-RBF (like
>> more doublespending at unknowing merchants, after years of FSS protection)
>> I think discussion of this FSS-RBF feature is worth considering.
>>
>> --
>> John Carvalho
>> CEO, Synonym.to <http://synonym.to/>;
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 8:09 AM Daniel Lipshitz <daniel at gap600.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for bringing that to my attention, apologies for not being
>>> aware of it.
>>>
>>> First-seen-safe replace-by-fee as detailed here
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-May/008248.html
>>> by Peter Todd seems to be a very suitable option and route
>>> which balances FullRBF while retaining the significant 0-conf use case.
>>>
>>> This would seem like a good way forward.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 6:20 AM Yuval Kogman <nothingmuch at woobling.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-May/008248.html
>>>>
>>> --
> ________________________________
> Daniel Lipshitz
> GAP600
> www.Gap600.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20221214/5b534adb/attachment-0001.html>;