Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

tx with non zero fee are rate limited #160

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

@tuxcanfly
Copy link
Contributor

@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly commented Aug 6, 2014

I'm seeing tx being rejected due to rate limit even though they have non zero fee. This is the same issue reported by @kargakis on btcsim:

btcsuite/btcsim#27

@davecgh
Copy link
Member

@davecgh davecgh commented Aug 6, 2014

I'll have to go over this more thoroughly as it's not code that I wrote, but I'm fairly certain this change is not accurate as it is. The point is not to only catch zero fee transactions, rather it is to catch transactions which are considered free for the purposes of the rate limiting. That is to say, transactions which have fees under a particular threshold (low-fee transactions).

@tuxcanfly
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly commented Aug 6, 2014

Yup, I'm looking at bitcoind and the check there is different:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L980

@kargakis
Copy link
Contributor

@kargakis kargakis commented Aug 6, 2014

I've set mining fee in btcsim to 1 BTC and this still happens. @tuxcanfly can you confirm that?

@tuxcanfly
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly commented Aug 6, 2014

@kargakis yup, the issue occurs regardless of fee if minRequiredFee == 0.

@tuxcanfly
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tuxcanfly tuxcanfly commented Aug 7, 2014

From what I've understood, the check for rejecting a low fee tx is based on minRequiredFee but the check for rate-limiting is based on minRelayFee, i.e. even if the minRequiredFee is 0, the fee needs to be above the mininum relay fee threshold.

@davecgh
Copy link
Member

@davecgh davecgh commented Aug 18, 2014

Closing this in favor of #163.

@davecgh davecgh closed this Aug 18, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants