The Pinning & Replacement Problem Set

The email discusses replacement cycling and its relationship to full-RBF (Replace-By-Fee). The sender accuses the recipient of being disingenuous by bringing up their own topic in relation to this exploit. They point out that in the case of anchor channels, it is not possible for the relevant transactions to turn BIP-125 RBF off because the 1 block CSV (Check Sequence Verify) delay forces RBF to be enabled.

The email mentions that AntPool, the largest pool, currently has full-RBF enabled, accounting for 28% of hash power. Other pools such as Binance Pool, Luxor, and BTC.com also have varying percentages of hash power mining with full-RBF. The sender argues that protocols should be designed with clear incentives to ensure security, rather than relying on vague hopes. To address this, the sender proposes a solution called OP_Expire, which does not rely on any particular mempool behavior and has good resistance to mempool sybil attacks.

A link to Peter Todd's website, petertodd.org, is provided in the email. However, it is unclear how this link is relevant to the discussion as it is not mentioned in the context of the email. The sender's email address is peter@petertodd.org.