On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 07:18:54PM -0500, James O'Beirne via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > I don't think implementing a CTV opcode that we expect to largely be
> > obsoleted by a TXHASH at a later date is yielding good value from a soft
> > fork process.
> Caching for something
> like TXHASH looks to me l
Hi Gloria,
Thanks for this RBF sum up. Few thoughts and more context comments if it
can help other readers.
> For starters, the absolute fee pinning attack is especially
> problematic if we apply the same rules (i.e. Rule #3 and #4) in
> Package RBF. Imagine that Alice (honest) and Bob (adversary
> if you have a counterparty who is malicious and they *take action* to
steal, then they can present you with two alternatives
Generally I don't think this is the case. In this case, these are
time-sensitive operations. There is no time to negotiate after the
malicious party has taken action. The
