[BIP Proposal] Removal of BIP 125 RBF signalling in wallet transactions

The discussion around the appropriate use of sequence values for signaling transaction replaceability in Bitcoin transactions raises significant points about network behaviors and the implications on wallet settings. Sequence values are crucial in determining whether a transaction can be replaced before it is confirmed. The most typical settings observed among users include setting the sequence at its maximum value (MAX), which is usually interpreted as final, one less than the maximum (MAX-1), indicating non-final but not explicitly replaceable, and two less than the maximum (MAX-2) to signal explicit replaceability.

Recent trends, as indicated by data from Mainnet Observer, show that approximately 75% of transactions over a recent 30-day period have signaled replaceability (Mainnet Observer Transactions Chart). However, the data does not specify the distribution between MAX and MAX-1 settings, leaving some ambiguity regarding the prevalence of each. This lack of clarity has prompted suggestions for further analysis, possibly through the creation of a Dune dashboard to provide more detailed insights.

The current network adoption of mempoolfullrbf, which implies general acceptance of replaceability regardless of the individual signals sent by older wallet versions, suggests that the predominant network behavior leans towards transactions being replaceable. Although some users continue to use the MAX-1 setting to denote a lack of intent to replace, this signal tends not to hold significant weight under network rules that favor replaceability. Given these dynamics, a shift towards a unified approach where all transactions use MAX-2 could simplify the signaling process. This would align more closely with the emergent network behavior where replaceability is assumed, making MAX-2 the more practical and transparent choice for transaction settings.