With the nodes running fullrbf, wallet doesn't need to opt into RBF. This patch
switches the default of wallet rbf to false. Users still have the option to
optin RBF via the individual transaction (and PSBT) creation RPCs - for now.
Post deprecation of -walletrbf startup option and removal of the same
option from the wallet_bumpfee.py test, the second node in this test
is no longer a rbf node, so update its name to reflect so.
Also update the rbf_node_address correspondingly.
Tested RPCs: createrawtransaction, fundrawtransaction, createpsbt, bumpfee
walletcreatefundedpsbt, send, sendtoaddress, sendmany, sendall, psbtbumpfee.
Remove the usage in all the tests where used except the ones where the
sequence is set to unique values to avoid creating duplicate transactions
simultaneously.
Its usage is preserved only in wallet_deprecated_rbf.py and thus the constant
is moved there. This will be removed as well in the next release when BIP 125
deprecated stuff is removed.
<!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
<!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->
For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/35442.
<!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->
See the guideline for information on the review process. A summary of reviews will appear here.
<!--174a7506f384e20aa4161008e828411d-->
Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
maxfeerate wallet startup option by ismaelsadeeq)If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.
<!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->
Possible places where named args for integral literals may be used (e.g. func(x, /*named_arg=*/0) in C++, and func(x, named_arg=0) in Python):
walletcreatefundedpsbt(..., False) in test/functional/rpc_psbt.pywalletcreatefundedpsbt(..., True) in test/functional/rpc_psbt.py<sup>2026-06-02 13:47:25</sup>
Not sure if a small test-only fixup needs a separate pull request. Can those two commits not just be included in the prior pull?
Also, it seems more important to remove MAX_BIP125_RBF_SEQUENCE from the real source code, so that the risk of pre-existing and future fingerprint vectors in this source code is reduced.
it seems more important to remove MAX_BIP125_RBF_SEQUENCE from the real source code, so that the risk of pre-existing and future fingerprint vectors in this source code is reduced.
Yes, it is more important but it can't be done cleanly until the feature is removed completely post deprecation. Whereas it can be done easily in functional tests because all the tests have been updated to not rely on this deprecated feature anymore.
Can those two commits not just be included in the prior pull?
I will look into it.
I will look into it.
I didn't want to increase the scope of the previous PR, that's why raised this separate PR here. I have pushed the last two test related commits in #35433 now but might remove them later if I notice they are making the review of that PR tougher for others.
24 | +`createrawtransaction`, `fundrawtransaction`, `createpsbt`, 25 | +`walletcreatefundedpsbt`, `send`, `sendtoaddress`, `sendmany`, 26 | +`sendall`, `bumpfee`, and `psbtbumpfee`. 27 | + 28 | +Moreover, the default value of -walletrbf startup option has been 29 | +switched to 0 in PR #35405.
I think that needs to be updated according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/35405/changes#r3340846939. Just for reference, I know this is still a draft.