Timeline for How was the dust limit of 546 satoshis was chosen? Why not 550 satoshis?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 2022 at 13:07 | comment | added | Giacomo Brunetta | how to calculate dust for Testnet pubkey hash (with testnet address like mutrAf4usv3HKNdpLwVD4ow2oLArL6Rez8) and Testnet script hash (with testnet address like 2N1SP7r92ZZJvYKG2oNtzPwYnzw62up7mTo)? Can I still consider 546 sats? Consider that one is about 34 and one is about 35 bits | |
| S Apr 16, 2019 at 2:58 | history | suggested | Mason Ticehurst | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
corrected spelling, added reference to core implementation
|
| Apr 15, 2019 at 23:25 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 16, 2019 at 2:58 | |||||
| Apr 15, 2019 at 16:48 | vote | accept | MCCCS | ||
| Apr 15, 2019 at 16:48 | comment | added | MCCCS | I think Ugam is right according to this. | |
| Apr 15, 2019 at 16:29 | comment | added | Ugam Kamat | Wasn't it the case that dust limit was introduced to prevent creation of UTXOs whose value is lower than the cost of scriptSig to spend it? For a 148 byte input, scriptSig would be 107 bytes. That is ~34*3. | |
| Apr 15, 2019 at 15:36 | comment | added | Raghav Sood |
@NateEldredge Absolutely - I'm trying to look up some sources I read ages ago on why 3*relay fee was selected. As for the relay fee bit, I believe it comes from the minrelaytxfee flag for bitcoind, which lets you control which transactions your node relays based on fee
|
|
| Apr 15, 2019 at 15:31 | comment | added | Nate Eldredge | I think this answer could be clarified a bit. It seems to boil down to the statement that "the dust limit is fixed at 3 satoshis per byte", which raises the question as to how this figure was selected. Also, referring to this as a "relay fee" seems misleading because no fees are collected by nodes who merely relay transactions. | |
| Apr 15, 2019 at 15:15 | history | answered | Raghav Sood | CC BY-SA 4.0 |