Newsletters: add 410 (2026-06-19)#2786
Conversation
bitschmidty
commented
Jun 12, 2026
bitschmidty
commented
- news
- https://bitcoincore.org/en/2026/06/06/privatebroadcast-ip-leak/ Presumably there will be a ML post and we cover that
- [BIP Proposal] Informational BIP on Low-R Signature Grinding
- [BIP Proposal] Removal of BIP 125 RBF signalling in wallet transactions
- client services @bitschmidty
- releases and notable code changes @Gustavojfe
- lede @bitschmidty
- topics @bitschmidty
This seems potentially unnecessary. We already reported on the bug fix last week, would a mailing list discussion about the same topic add any new information? |
It is what we usually do IIRC. In this case we were able to get a primary guest for the PR (and PR coverage was before a corresponding news item) which means we covered it in good depth. Although a news item would probably reach more people. |
| to the Bitcoin-Dev mailing list about the current effort to remove the [RBF][topic rbf] | ||
| signaling in transactions, as defined by [BIP125][]. That BIP specifies that a transaction | ||
| can opt-in to RBF, if the `nSequence` number is set to a value lower than | ||
| `0xffffffff - 1` (i.e. `nSequence = MAX-2`). Since the merging of `mempoolfullrbf`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe you can add an Optech reference link here.
| can opt-in to RBF, if the `nSequence` number is set to a value lower than | ||
| `0xffffffff - 1` (i.e. `nSequence = MAX-2`). Since the merging of `mempoolfullrbf`, | ||
| that signaling number have become redundant, and any transaction can be replaced using | ||
| that parameter. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Its unclear what that parameter is here?
| signaling in transactions, as defined by [BIP125][]. That BIP specifies that a transaction | ||
| can opt-in to RBF, if the `nSequence` number is set to a value lower than | ||
| `0xffffffff - 1` (i.e. `nSequence = MAX-2`). Since the merging of `mempoolfullrbf`, | ||
| that signaling number have become redundant, and any transaction can be replaced using |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe?
| that signaling number have become redundant, and any transaction can be replaced using | |
| that signaling value has become unnecessary, and any transaction can be replaced using |
| feedback from the wallet developers community to find a default input sequence number | ||
| which could get wide adoption. | ||
|
|
||
| Feedback was provided by Murch and Electrum Wallet contributor SomberNight. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe can eliminate this intro sentence and just intro the murch item with "Feedback from Murch..." or the like
|
Pushed a fixup for the build error in @TumaBitcoiner and left some comments |
| negotiation framework (see Newsletters [#386][news386 bip434] and | ||
| [#390][news390 bip434]). It adds a `feature` P2P message that may be | ||
| exchanged between `version` and `verack` to advertise optional peer | ||
| features, and increases the P2P protocol version number to `70017`. Bitcoin |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe:
| features, and increases the P2P protocol version number to `70017`. Bitcoin | |
| features, and bumps the P2P protocol version number to `70017`. Bitcoin |
| signaling in transactions, as defined by [BIP125][]. That BIP specifies that a transaction | ||
| can opt-in to RBF, if the `nSequence` number is set to a value lower than | ||
| `0xffffffff - 1` (i.e. `nSequence = MAX-2`). Since the merging of `mempoolfullrbf`, | ||
| that signaling number have become redundant, and any transaction can be replaced using | ||
| that parameter. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This sentence has several issues.
- There is one
nSequencenumber per input, not one per transaction. - "lower than
0xffffffff - 1(i.e.nSequence = MAX-2)" the id est here could be understood as suggesting that0xffffffff − 1andMAX−2are the same, because the latter is only one number that is lower out of many - The last sentence could be read as suggesting that
mempoolfullrbfis a transaction-level parameter.
Maybe something along the lines of:
| signaling in transactions, as defined by [BIP125][]. That BIP specifies that a transaction | |
| can opt-in to RBF, if the `nSequence` number is set to a value lower than | |
| `0xffffffff - 1` (i.e. `nSequence = MAX-2`). Since the merging of `mempoolfullrbf`, | |
| that signaling number have become redundant, and any transaction can be replaced using | |
| that parameter. | |
| signaling in transactions, as defined by [BIP125][]. BIP125 specifies that a transaction | |
| can opt-in to RBF by setting at least one `nSequence` number to a value lower than | |
| `0xffffffff - 1` (e.g. `nSequence = MAX-2`). Since `mempoolfullrbf` has been broadly adopted, | |
| any transaction can be replaced regardless of its nSequence values. |
4 participants
