Hi,
I have few questions regarding ListTransaction RPC call and I hope you can
help me.
Documentation for the RPC call is here:
https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#listtransactions
1. What does it mean for a transaction ( with 0 confirmations ) to be
*trusted* or not?
There is such field i
2) -1 doesn't mean conflicted, it means the transaction is not only
unconfirmed buy depends on another unconfirmed transaction.
1) Depends on what you mean by trusted. If you are giving the user online
access to something that costs you next to nothing to revoke if there is a
problem later, no pr
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:29 AM, Maksim Solovjov via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> 1. What does it mean for a transaction ( with 0 confirmations ) to be
> trusted or not?
It is trusted if (1) it is final (i.e. it can't be replaced), (2) it
is not in a block that was reorged out (negative confirmation coun
Clarification on one part below:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Karl-Johan Alm
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:29 AM, Maksim Solovjov via bitcoin-dev
> wrote:
>> 1. What does it mean for a transaction ( with 0 confirmations ) to be
>> trusted or not?
>
> It is trusted if (1) it is final (i.
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 02:22:42PM +0900, Karl-Johan Alm via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Clarification on one part below:
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Karl-Johan Alm
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:29 AM, Maksim Solovjov via bitcoin-dev
> > wrote:
> >> 1. What does it mean for a transact
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
> Or via full replace-by-fee, which appears to be used by a significant minority
> of miners:
I was of the impression that final transactions (sequence=0x)
cannot be RBF'd.
___
bitcoin-dev maili
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 05:10:43PM +0900, Karl-Johan Alm wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
> > Or via full replace-by-fee, which appears to be used by a significant
> > minority
> > of miners:
>
> I was of the impression that final transactions (sequence=0x)
> c
Thanks for clarifying!
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:48 PM, ZmnSCPxj wrote:
> Good morning Karl-Johan Alm,
>
> To clarify:
>
> Nothing prevents a miner from completely ignoring nSequence when putting
> transactions in blocks.
>
> Unconfirmed transactions are, by definition, not recorded in blocks.
Good morning Karl-Johan Alm,
To clarify:
Nothing prevents a miner from completely ignoring nSequence when putting
transactions in blocks.
Unconfirmed transactions are, by definition, not recorded in blocks. So if
there is a transaction 0xFFF nSequence and fee 1000 satoshi, and another
co
OK.
Thank you guys for clarification.
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Karl-Johan Alm via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying!
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:48 PM, ZmnSCPxj wrote:
> > Good morning Karl-Johan Alm,
> >
> > To clarify:
> >
> > Nothin
10 matches
Mail list logo
