I understand there's a need to relax the data carrier limits for new use cases but opening it up to the max block size seems like an overshoot. I want to retain the optionality, though I understand that, after block confirmation, my node will end up storing the data that guys like yourself relayed to the miners. It's a catch 22.

Replies (2)

jb55's avatar
jb55 _@jb55.com 4 months ago
its just relaxing the filters to what is actually reflected in the protocol rules. The more divergence between relay policy and consensus rules and economic activity, the less accurate your node is when doing fee estimation.
> its just relaxing the filters to what is actually reflected in the protocol rules. Which is the max block size. > the less accurate your node is when doing fee estimation. I never had a substantial discrepancy in fee estimates. I don't think there are many new attack vectors introduced by these changes but still, as good practice, no upgrading to newer versions before they have been out for a prolonged time. It surely will lead to a cleaner code, that I agree.