This week’s newsletter summarizes a discussion about fee bumping and
transaction fee sponsorship, describes a proposal for an updated LN
gossip wire protocol, and advertises a signet for testing
OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY. Also included are our regular sections with
selected questions and answers from the Bitcoin Stack Exchange and
descriptions of notable changes to popular Bitcoin infrastructure
● Fee bumping and transaction fee sponsorship: separate from the replace-by-fee discussion started a couple weeks ago (see Newsletter #186), this week James O’Beirne started a discussion about fee bumping. In particular, O’Beirne is concerned that some of the transaction relay policy changes being proposed will complicate the use of fee bumping for users and wallet developers. As an alternative, he seeks renewed consideration of transaction fee sponsorship (previously described in Newsletter #116).
The ideas received significant discussion on the mailing list, with many responses mentioning challenges to implementation of fee sponsorship.
● Updated LN gossip proposal: Rusty Russell posted to the Lightning-Dev mailing list a detailed proposal for a new set of LN gossip messages similar to his 2019 proposal described in Newsletter #55. The new proposal uses BIP340-style schnorr signatures and x-only public keys. Also included are a number of simplifications over the existing LN gossip protocol, which is used to advertise the existence of public channels for routing. The updated protocol is designed to maximize efficiency, especially when combined with an erlay-like minisketch-based efficient gossip protocol.
● CTV signet: Jeremy Rubin published parameters and code for a signet with OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY activated. This simplifies public experimentation with the proposed opcode and makes it much easier to test compatibility between different software using the code.
Selected Q&A from Bitcoin Stack Exchange
Bitcoin Stack Exchange is one of the first places Optech contributors look for answers to their questions—or when we have a few spare moments to help curious or confused users. In this monthly feature, we highlight some of the top-voted questions and answers posted since our last update.
● Will a post-subsidy block with no transactions include a coinbase transaction? Pieter Wuille explains that every block must have a coinbase transaction and since every transaction must include at least one input and one output, a post-subsidy block with no block reward (no fees and no subsidy) will still require at least one zero-value output.
● How can the genesis block contain arbitrary data on it if the script is invalid? Pieter Wuille lists the reasons why the genesis block’s coinbase “Chancellor…” text push is valid. First, the genesis block is valid by definition. Second is that coinbase input scripts are never executed. Third is that, for non-taproot inputs, the requirement of a single element on the stack after execution is only a policy rule, not a consensus rule. Finally, that policy rule applies only to the final stack after an input script is executed together with the corresponding output script. Since there are no corresponding output scripts for the inputs of coinbase transactions, the policy does not apply. Wuille also notes the reason for the genesis block’s unspendability is unrelated to this discussion and involves the original Bitcoin software not adding the genesis block to its internal database.
● What is a Feeler Connection? When is it used? User vnprc explains the purpose of Bitcoin Core’s feeler connection which is a temporary outbound connection separate from the default 8 outbound connections and 2 blocks-only outbound connections. The feeler connection is used to test potential new peers suggested from the gossip network as well as test previously unreachable peers which are candidates for eviction.
● Are OP_RETURN transactions not stored in chainstate database? Antoine Poinsot points out that since
OP_RETURNoutputs are unspendable, they are not stored in the chainstate directory.
Notable code and documentation changes
Notable changes this week in Bitcoin Core, C-Lightning, Eclair, LDK, LND, libsecp256k1, Hardware Wallet Interface (HWI), Rust Bitcoin, BTCPay Server, BDK, Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs), and Lightning BOLTs.
● Bitcoin Core #24307 extends the result object of the
getwalletinfoRPC with the
external_signerfield. This new field indicates whether the wallet is configured to use an external signer such as a hardware signing device.
● C-Lightning #5010 adds a language binding generation tool
MsgGenand a Rust RPC client
MsgGenparses C-Lightning’s JSON-RPC schemas and generates the Rust bindings used by
cln-rpcto correctly call the C-Lightning JSON-RPC interface.
● LDK #1199 adds support for “phantom node payments”, payments that can be accepted by any one of several nodes, which can be used for load balancing. This requires creating LN invoices with BOLT11 route hints that suggest multiple paths all to the same non-existent (“phantom”) node. For each of the paths, the last hop before reaching the phantom node is a real node that knows the phantom node’s key for decrypting and reconstructing stateless invoices (see Newsletter #181), allowing it to accept the payment’s HTLC.