Re: [bitcoin-dev] Playing with full-rbf peers for fun and L2s security

2022-06-21 Thread Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev
> BTW I changed one of my OTS calendars to issue fee-bumping txs without the > opt-in RBF flag set as an experiment. I also made sure txs would propagate to > the above node. As of right now, it's up to 32 replacements (once per block), > without any of them mined; the calendars use the strategy of

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Playing with full-rbf peers for fun and L2s security

2022-06-21 Thread Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev
HI alicexbt, > Lets consider there are 2 users with name Bob (normal LN user) and Carol (attacker running LN node) which I will use in this email for examples. In this case Bob and Carol can manage security of their OS and it is not affected by others using vulnerable systems or OS. Yes, I believ

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin covenants are inevitable

2022-06-21 Thread Eric Voskuil via bitcoin-dev
> On Jun 21, 2022, at 12:28, Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > >  > > The PoW security of Bitcoin benefits all Bitcoin users, proportional to the > value of BTC they hold; if Bitcoin blocks aren't reliably created the value of > *all* BTC goes down. It doesn't make sense for the ent

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin covenants are inevitable

2022-06-21 Thread Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev
> The PoW security of Bitcoin benefits all Bitcoin users, proportional to the value of BTC they hold; if Bitcoin blocks aren't reliably created the value of *all* BTC goes down. It doesn't make sense for the entire cost of that security to be paid for on a per-tx basis. And there's a high chance pa