Hi Matt,
The feerate policy change was rolled out not just with the Bitcoin Core
30.0 release, but also backported to Bitcoin Core 29.1. According to
e.g., Clark Moody’s dashboard, that means that over 30% of listening
nodes already use the lower incremental feerate (assuming they use the
default value). Per a quick calculation even non-listening nodes with
only eight connections should have an over 94% chance to have at least
one peer that accepts and rebroadcasts such a replacement
transaction—and rising.
Meanwhile, very few wallets so far support creating transactions with
lower feerates or implement replacements with the lower
incrementalrelayfee. Presumably the wallet adoption will continue to
trail the node policy adoption in this regard, exactly due to the
current unreliable state.
I am not convinced that special handling for the incrementalrelayfee is
necessary at this time, and either way, a more general approach such as
the recently proposed BIP 153: SENDTEMPLATE (PR:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1937) would feel like a bigger bang
for the buck in that regard.
Best,
Murch
On 2026-01-06 17:36, Matthew Husák wrote:
Hi all!
Core 30.0 defaults both minrelaytxfee and incrementalrelayfee to 0.1
sat/vB now, but lots of nodes still run 1 sat/vB for
incrementalrelayfee (or other settings).
*Problem 1*: You send RBF tx → your node accepts → peers reject
replacements → dead end.
*Problem 2*: You can't see what min RBF fee peers have.
The obvious fix is to manually connect to peers with matching
incrementalrelayfee, which is impossible because this policy isn't
exposed over P2P. BIP133 feefilter only signals minrelaytxfee.
*Proposal*: Extend feefilter with incrementalrelayfee field (parallel
to minrelaytxfee). Peers can then filter out un-bumpable RBF invs,
reducing spam and improving propagation.
*Benefits*:
- spam protection: your node stops spamming peers with un-bumpable RBFs
- transparency: you can see what RBF policy other nodes use, thus you
can find miner node which you can add as manual peer
- pure policy change, no consensus risk
*WDYT guys?*
Happy to prototype or draft a BIP if there's interest.
Cheers,
Matt.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/d3ddaf1c-44c9-4ebd-98fe-88e03a84891en%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/d3ddaf1c-44c9-4ebd-98fe-88e03a84891en%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin
Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/7992d314-c068-4bea-b3da-03d65ea2d334%40murch.one.
