Bitcoin Forum

Hi,

It may be so arranged that transactions are first signed by some trusted gateways, and then included to block by miners. Miners will choose their trusted gateways, and will not accept the transactions except for those signed by one of their trusted gateways. The gateways will act a spam filter, which enable transactions with zero fees.

How's that sound?

Why should the miners want that? They like the tx-fees they get.

Other than that, the gateways you are talking about sounds like general nodes. Nodes decide which txs they relay or not.

You said spam filter. Spam filter for what kinda transaction non-standard & zero fee transactions?
Even if they did set up one and every miner switched to those trusted gateways what's gonna happen to the transaction that the gateway drops.

Why should every miner switch to those "gateways" some big pools fill their block with free transactions in order to reach the min block size It could lead to more waiting for tx's to come or to orphan blocks. And the same question what will happen to tx's that those gateways doesn't relay would those transactions just simply float and never confirm(if so good for me don't ask why)?

Kapitha sehitha mento he, piyanta kopali mukanta di? Thi he hijima teoni puhino kuraslei. Pekish de parlo purefy winto sike pish kuranta. Puh fo, kiladi thrivenda basa piyanthe?

#1 spamfilter sounds like censoring transactions
#2 mining has costs, who would pay for those when there is no more blockreward?
#3 what problem are you trying to solve here? Spam would just get confirmed by other miners.

To support fee-free economy. To show that this is achievable.

They will not even be counted as a transaction. The balance will still be in the sender's wallet.

In order for this, not only miners but also all coin holders should trust the gateways, though. It makes everything a bit somewhat semi-centralised, but still what I am asking is whether it's doable or not.

In the original "Bitcoin" paper, the first network action is written as "New transactions are broadcast to all nodes" (Section 5). Now, there will be one step prior to that; the transaction request is signed by a zero fee gateway. So it would be like a multisig wallet, one signature of which is the signature of the gateway server.

OK, just make it obligatory for the entire network to use the gateways. I am just trying to see whether that is something achievable from a technical perspective. Whether or not we should do that is another question.

Again, mining has costs. The hardware costs, the electricity, cooling, etc. Why would miners do this?


Sure its achievable, but why? Why would you want to replace a trustless network (bitcoin) with a central authority (like paypal)?

From a technical perspective?  Sure.  You could write software that would do that.

However, it wouldn't be a part of bitcoin unless you can convince an overwhelming majority of those running full nodes to use your new software.  Since it destroys the trustless nature of bitcoin, I don't think you're going to be able to get that overwhelming majority that you need.

Therefore, you're left with either creating an altcoin that includes this behavior and trying to convince people that your altcoin is worth using, or abandoning the idea as impossible to implement.

You are welcome to set your own mining computer (and even create mining pool) into the bitcoin network and confirm zero-fee transactions.
Your IP address will be known as "zero-fee gateway address"
No additional programming and protocol changing needed.

Thank you all for the answers.