On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 03:17:51AM +0000, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > And the > > impression I got from the PR review club discussion more seemed like > > devs making assumptions about businesses rather than having talked to > > them (eg "[I] think there are fewer and fewer businesses who absolutely > > cannot survive without relying on zeroconf. Or at least hope so"). > > Even I noticed this since I don't recall the developers of the 3 main > coinjoin implementations that are claimed to be impacted by opt-in RBF making > any remarks.
FYI I personally asked Max Hillebrand from Wasabi about full-rbf last night.
He gave me permission to republish our conversation:
> Hey, I wanted to know if you had any comments on full-rbf re: wasabi?
Doesn't really affect us, afaik
The cj doesn't signal rbf right now
And I guess it's a DoS vector if any input double spent will be relayed
after successful signing
But we have way bigger / cheaper DoS vectors that don't get "exploited"
So probably doesn't matter
Wasabi client handles replacements / reorgs gracefully, so should be alright
We don't yet "use" rbf in the sense of fee bumping tx, but we should / will
eventually
I haven't asked Joinmarket yet. But the impact on their implementation should
be very similar.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
