📅 Original date posted:2022-03-12
📝 Original message:> We should remove the dust limit from Bitcoin.
Any node operator can do that. Just put "dustrelayfee=0.00000000" in your bitcoin.conf.
And there is more: you can also conditionally allow free transactions:
mintxfee=0.00000001
minrelaytxfee=0.00000000
blockmintxfee=0.00000000
Then, when using getblocktemplate you will get transactions with the highest fees first anyway, and you include cheap or free transactions in the end, if there will be enough room for them.
So, all of those settings are in the hands of node operators, there is no need to change the source code, all you need is to convince nodes to change their settings.
On 2021-08-08 20:53:28 user Jeremy via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
We should remove the dust limit from Bitcoin. Five reasons:
1) it's not our business what outputs people want to create
2) dust outputs can be used in various authentication/delegation smart contracts
3) dust sized htlcs in lightning (https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/46730/can-you-send-amounts-that-would-typically-be-considered-dust-through-the-light) force channels to operate in a semi-trusted mode which has implications (AFAIU) for the regulatory classification of channels in various jurisdictions; agnostic treatment of fund transfers would simplify this (like getting a 0.01 cent dividend check in the mail)
4) thinly divisible colored coin protocols might make use of sats as value markers for transactions.
5) should we ever do confidential transactions we can't prevent it without compromising privacy / allowed transfers
The main reasons I'm aware of not allow dust creation is that:
1) dust is spam
2) dust fingerprinting attacks
1 is (IMO) not valid given the 5 reasons above, and 2 is preventable by well behaved wallets to not redeem outputs that cost more in fees than they are worth.
cheers,
jeremy
vjudeu at gazeta.pl [ARCHIVE] /
npub135…nssga
2023-06-07 23:06:25
in reply to nevent1q…eej4
Author Public Key
npub1357006afyypkgz03lmq8fnuvlkyjt0rukx8rt56ck8xv396jaceqmnssgaPublished at
2023-06-07 23:06:25Event JSON
{
"id": "8c81a3f10744821b698746e38d8647cae1311807fe71f76fce2d6d144051c473",
"pubkey": "8d3cf7eba921036409f1fec074cf8cfd8925bc7cb18e35d358b1ccc89752ee32",
"created_at": 1686179185,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"b0907fd0bf0bc34989ce1dd739046b02fd6e9644b26e4bbae128d5ae81fa10a1",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2022-03-12\n📝 Original message:\u003e We should remove the dust limit from Bitcoin.\n\nAny node operator can do that. Just put \"dustrelayfee=0.00000000\" in your bitcoin.conf.\n\nAnd there is more: you can also conditionally allow free transactions:\n\nmintxfee=0.00000001\nminrelaytxfee=0.00000000\nblockmintxfee=0.00000000\n\nThen, when using getblocktemplate you will get transactions with the highest fees first anyway, and you include cheap or free transactions in the end, if there will be enough room for them.\n\nSo, all of those settings are in the hands of node operators, there is no need to change the source code, all you need is to convince nodes to change their settings.\n\n\nOn 2021-08-08 20:53:28 user Jeremy via bitcoin-dev \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\nWe should remove the dust limit from Bitcoin. Five reasons:\n\n\n1) it's not our business what outputs people want to create\n2) dust outputs can be used in various authentication/delegation smart contracts\n3) dust sized htlcs in lightning (https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/46730/can-you-send-amounts-that-would-typically-be-considered-dust-through-the-light) force channels to operate in a semi-trusted mode which has implications (AFAIU) for the regulatory classification of channels in various jurisdictions; agnostic treatment of fund transfers would simplify this (like getting a 0.01 cent dividend check in the mail)\n4) thinly divisible colored coin protocols might make use of sats as value markers for transactions.\n5) should we ever do confidential transactions we can't prevent it without compromising privacy / allowed transfers\n\n\nThe main reasons I'm aware of not allow dust creation is that:\n\n\n1) dust is spam\n2) dust fingerprinting attacks\n\n\n1 is (IMO) not valid given the 5 reasons above, and 2 is preventable by well behaved wallets to not redeem outputs that cost more in fees than they are worth.\n\n\ncheers,\n\n\njeremy",
"sig": "1d902e8facc6356b5a02b938657659d1c6c40b2e905f107d6c0b3852b7899b2c17ff1be7260d1c474ebb629f85eb1c7e2f7174896be2794a2911f135d754d70e"
}