CheckTemplateVerify Does Not Scale Due to UTXO's Required For Fee Payment

The discussion focuses on the potential risks associated with a specific use-case of CTV (CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY), cautioning that while it may seem appealing, it could lead to the creation of protocols with unforeseen issues. A notable concern is the efficiency comparison between CPFP (Child Pays for Parent) and RBF (Replace-By-Fee). The argument presented is that anchor outputs/CPFP are less efficient than RBF due to the additional bytes required for the CPFP transaction. This inefficiency is viewed as a threat to mining decentralization since using fewer bytes for out-of-band fee payments is preferable.

It's suggested that addressing the fee payment mechanisms before CTV becomes standardized is crucial. The aim is to prevent the establishment of inflexible CPFP designs, which would encourage out-of-band fee payments and perpetuate inefficiencies in the system. It is implied that there's an opportunity to refine the CTV standard to support more efficient methods like RBF for fee payment, thereby avoiding the drawbacks of the current CPFP approach. For further information or to engage in discussion, contact can be made via the provided email link, formatted according to markdown syntax: peter@petertodd.org.