fee

[downying]

In my wallet, for an attempt to send 0.001 btc, it says, it needs some fee, but when I tried 2 btc, it's free of charge, why ?

[CoinMan]

To prevent "penny-flooding" denial-of-service attacks on the network.

[Cyberdyne]

Please read this: http://bitcoinfees.com

Detailed article by a long time forum member here.

[nobbynobbynoob]

Please read this: http://bitcoinfees.com

Detailed article by a long time forum member here.

Brilliant. Succinct and very well explained.

[bbit]

Please read this: http://bitcoinfees.com

Detailed article by a long time forum member here.

haha awesome!

[key2]

Please read this: http://bitcoinfees.com

Detailed article by a long time forum member here.

The only thing I don't understand from that article is the first example. The change is coming from the vendor right? If He's paying 3BTC for something that costs 2.999BTC, he should get back .001 - why does the fee get charged to him?

Also, I don't get why he can't complete the purchase even with the fee. If he gets .001 back in change and the fee is .0005 - he can still afford it with .0005 leftover, right?

[Cyberdyne]

Please read this: http://bitcoinfees.com

Detailed article by a long time forum member here.

The only thing I don't understand from that article is the first example. The change is coming from the vendor right? If He's paying 3BTC for something that costs 2.999BTC, he should get back .001 - why does the fee get charged to him?

Also, I don't get why he can't complete the purchase even with the fee. If he gets .001 back in change and the fee is .0005 - he can still afford it with .0005 leftover, right?

First of all, the change is not coming back from the 'vendor'. The change never reaches the vendor in the first place - the transaction is generated within your client and the change is sent from one of your addresses directly to another of your addresses. The vendor only gets the amount you intend to send them - the purchase price.

So
2.999 BTC - to vendor for purchase
+
0.001 BTC - change (directly from your wallet into another 'change' address in your wallet)
+
0.0005 BTC - transaction fee (caused by having a low output - the 0.001)

These three amounts add up to 3.0005 BTC which is more than you have in your wallet, so the transaction cannot proceed.

[key2]

Please read this: http://bitcoinfees.com

Detailed article by a long time forum member here.

The only thing I don't understand from that article is the first example. The change is coming from the vendor right? If He's paying 3BTC for something that costs 2.999BTC, he should get back .001 - why does the fee get charged to him?

Also, I don't get why he can't complete the purchase even with the fee. If he gets .001 back in change and the fee is .0005 - he can still afford it with .0005 leftover, right?

First of all, the change is not coming back from the 'vendor'. The change never reaches the vendor in the first place - the transaction is generated within your client and the change is sent from one of your addresses directly to another of your addresses. The vendor only gets the amount you intend to send them - the purchase price.

So
2.999 BTC - to vendor for purchase
+
0.001 BTC - change (directly from your wallet into another 'change' address in your wallet)
+
0.0005 BTC - transaction fee (caused by having a low output - the 0.001)

These three amounts add up to 3.0005 BTC which is more than you have in your wallet, so the transaction cannot proceed.

Ok - so it's not that he didn't have enough BTC, it's actually that the total number of separate outputs is more than 3BTC.

But the person's change is still theirs right? It goes back into one of their other addresses so wouldn't their total amount of BTC still be .0005? They have .001 of change and are charged a .0005 transaction fee.

[Cyberdyne]

Yes, but at the point when that tx is being constructed, the change address doesn't have it's 0.001 yet so it can't be counted as part of your wallet's balance.

The author of the article is better at explaining all this stuff than I am - That's why I got him to write it - But I'll certainly pass your comments along.

[key2]

Yes, but at the point when that tx is being constructed, the change address doesn't have it's 0.001 yet so it can't be counted as part of your wallet's balance.

The author of the article is better at explaining all this stuff than I am - That's why I got him to write it - But I'll certainly pass your comments along.

Ok thanks, I think I understand it now - it's more to do with the order in which inputs and outputs are processed rather than the final amount in question.