I think full RBF is gonna hit BTC sooner than we think. Haven't seen anyone talk about it here yet.
Discussion on Full RBF and Its Implications for Bitcoin
22 replies 63 views
diamond_minerFull Member
Posts: 138 · Reputation: 623
#2Apr 6, 2017, 04:31 AM
Yeah, I agree. Most nodes will probably adopt it. Miners will make more from fees during congestion, so they’ll be all over it.
Definitely will help reduce mempool jams. If people can bump fees, unconfirmed transactions have a better shot at getting mined.
But what about when the adoption is still low? If only a few nodes support it, we could still see issues with transactions getting stuck.
Sounds like a lottery for a bit. Non-RBF transactions might get rejected despite a majority using the new rules. It’s tricky.
True, but we know that RBF needs to be signaled. No confirmation means no trust in the transaction.
5tack_moonNewbie
Posts: 84 · Reputation: 29
#7Apr 10, 2017, 12:33 PM
Most SPV wallets don’t run their own nodes. Electrum users will be at the mercy of server operators enabling RBF.
For casual users, this is gonna suck. They won’t want to mess with LN or anything if they only use BTC once in a while.
I noticed not much buzz about this outside the usual circles. Everyone's too focused on the market crash.
I bet a lot of businesses will stick to Lightning for smaller transactions. Lower fees during mempool congestion, for sure.
Does this mean RBF is only default if most nodes turn it on? Or is this just the first step towards that?
chrisomegaFull Member
Posts: 158 · Reputation: 631
#12Apr 12, 2017, 03:41 AM
Yeah, I read Antoine Riard's post too. Some of it was over my head, but RBF seems like it’s about getting everyone used to transaction risks.
I’m not sure, but I keep using RBF even when I probably shouldn't. Waiting for confirmations is just part of the game.
For sure, if going on-chain, one confirmation is a must. I’d consider using a custodian LN wallet for ease.
So full RBF isn’t enabled by default? Seems like a mess if some nodes don’t catch up.
chrisomegaFull Member
Posts: 158 · Reputation: 631
#16Apr 13, 2017, 03:45 PM
Exactly. If you enable it and I don’t, we’re stuck with the old rules. No hard fork, but different mempool views.
Right, so Alice and Bob could have different views on transactions if they run different node versions.
Yeah, Alice might miss out on potential transactions because she’s not on the new rules. That’s a downside.
FSS-RBF is a mess too. Only ended up being used by a few miners and then dropped. Doesn’t really help security.
I miss the days of zero confirmation transactions. Those were fun.
Related topics
- Thoughts on Bitcoin Core Update V30 and Its Impact 22
- New Bitcoin Improvement Proposal with $100 Reward 9
- Running Bitcoin Core on a Laptop with Limited Storage 20
- Exploring Blockstream's Satellite Tech and Its Potential 22
- Creating Custom Bitcoin Addresses with Vanitygen 20
- Slow Sync Issues with Bitcoin Core 4