Add wallets that support RBF #994

pull ghost wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from changing 1 files +11 −5

ghost commented at 11:34 AM on September 11, 2020: none

Source: https://bitcoinops.org/en/compatibility/#replace-by-fee-rbf https://bluewallet.io/features/#rbf-cpfp https://github.com/Fonta1n3/FullyNoded/blob/2976f47457ebb50af14e5e4d098560c99c123e18/Docs/Wallets/Sending.md#Replace-By-Fee

Add wallets that support RBF

Source: 
https://bitcoinops.org/en/compatibility/#replace-by-fee-rbf 
https://bluewallet.io/features/#rbf-cpfp
https://github.com/Fonta1n3/FullyNoded/blob/2976f47457ebb50af14e5e4d098560c99c123e18/Docs/Wallets/Sending.md#Replace-By-Fee

6313767c5d

luke-jr added the label Proposed BIP modification on Oct 5, 2020
luke-jr commented at 5:33 PM on October 5, 2020: member

@harding @petertodd
harding commented at 5:49 PM on October 5, 2020: contributor

@prayank23 this section was meant to show that, at the time opt-in RBF was added to Bitcoin Core, no wallet's existing behavior would cause it to signal replacability (which its authors might not want). I don't think this section needs to be updated (allowing placement within historical context is one reason BIPs have creation dates), but if you do find this out-of-date information confusing, the section could start with something like "At the time opt-in RBF support was added to Bitcoin Core, no known wallet created [...]"
MarcoFalke commented at 5:55 PM on October 5, 2020: member

In newer BIPs this section is called "Backwards compatibility", see https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#specification

If this was unclear, maybe the section name can be changed as well?
ghost commented at 6:06 PM on October 5, 2020: none

Thanks for clarification

"At the time opt-in RBF support was added to Bitcoin Core, no known wallet created [...]"

If this was unclear, maybe the section name can be changed as well?

Either of the above can be done to avoid confusion in my opinion.
harding commented at 6:29 PM on October 5, 2020: contributor

I think the name change suggested by @MarcoFalke is simplest and would be entirely effective. @prayank23 did you want to update your PR to make that change?
ghost commented at 7:12 PM on October 5, 2020: none

~~Client support~~ Backwards compatibility

No known wallet currently creates transactions by default with nSequence set below (0xffffffff - 1), so no known existing wallet explicitly signals replaceability by default. No known popular wallet spends other users' unconfirmed transactions by default, so no known existing wallets signals inherited replaceability.

At the time opt-in RBF support was added/proposed, no known wallet created transactions by default with nSequence set below (0xffffffff - 1), so no known wallet explicitly signaled replaceability by default. Also no known popular wallet spent other users' unconfirmed transactions by default, so no known wallets signaled inherited replaceability. @harding does this look okay?
harding commented at 7:46 PM on October 5, 2020: contributor

@prayank23 looks great!
unknown cross-referenced this on Oct 5, 2020 from issue BIP 125: Change 'Client support' to 'Backwards compatibility' by ghost
ghost commented at 9:13 PM on October 5, 2020: none

Closing this PR. New PR: #1004 with branch name specific to change and update "client support" section as discussed.
unknown closed this on Oct 5, 2020

Contributors

Labels

Proposed BIP modification

Linked (view graph)

#1004 BIP 125: Change 'Client support' to 'Backwards compatibility'