On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:36:59AM -0500, Russell O'Connor wrote: > I don't believe that the default RBF policy works that way. My > understanding is that current policy requires an absolute fee increase (by > an amount related to incrementalrelayfee).
Indeed, you are correct (BIP125 rule 4[1]).
Thanks for the correction,
-Dave
[1] For the curious, the relevant code from master's validation.cpp:
// Finally in addition to paying more fees than the conflicts the
// new transaction must pay for its own bandwidth.
CAmount nDeltaFees = nModifiedFees - nConflictingFees;
if (nDeltaFees < ::incrementalRelayFee.GetFee(nSize))
{
return state.DoS(0, false,
REJECT_INSUFFICIENTFEE, "insufficient fee", false,
strprintf("rejecting replacement %s, not enough additional fees
to relay; %s < %s",
hash.ToString(),
FormatMoney(nDeltaFees),
FormatMoney(::incrementalRelayFee.GetFee(nSize))));
}
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
