Good thinking. Your point also applies to CoinJoins (both equal-output and payjoin), and to any transaction where multiple parties contribute inputs.
The BIP should say "at least one of the inputs of the transaction" with a suggestion that on-chain wallets just randomly pick an input. On 28/06/2021 11:55, Ben Carman via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> If nSequence is set it should apply only to the first input of the > transaction, if it has multiple inputs. > > This could have complications with DLCs and dual funded lightning. In both > protocols the ordering of the inputs is not know until both parties have > revealed all of their inputs, and during the reveal the nSequence is given. > If we want DLCs and dual funded lightning to be compatible it would be better > to have it define it as “at least one of the inputs of the transaction” > instead of “it should apply only to the first input of the transaction” > > benthecarman > > > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
