If your coinjoin implementation relies on parameters that aren't part of consensus rules...
Maybe your implementation is shit and needs to be updated
Login to reply
Replies (14)
May i have more context? What did I miss?
Consensus rules are different from local node policies
Correct, a good coinjoin looks like any other txn
Some of whirlpool's coinjoin transactions are being filtered by ocean's Bitcoin node. Samourai and others are calling it censorship, but Luke Dashjr is saying it's not intentional or targeted at coinjoin, but some coinjoin transactions do not fall within certain consensus rules, and consequently get filtered.
Ser how many mixes do you recommend to effectively break links? Haven’t gotten any good answers.
You would think
Just one is fine
Thank you. The join implemented on Sparrow check out?
Yep, but be careful with your bad bank
All implementations (joinmarket,joinstr,whirlpool,wasabi) have their unique on chain footprint
"Consensus" neq "what all nodes will propagate"
"Consensus" EQ "what all nodes will accept in a block"
Large op_returns don't violate consensus.
I do 10+, because low time preference.
How many sats would we have to zap this post to have you explain the opcode angst going on here--->
View quoted note →
Couldn't be more wrong.