Wallet CoinJoin Doc Review Comments #32
Conversation
suemto
commented
Mar 10, 2021
suemto
commented
- Try to give a few minor review comments as example :-)
|
|
||
| This method can allow to obfuscate regular transactions, but it's not the primary use case for multiple reasons. In case of Non interactive transactions (NIT) it will be used more easily for regular transactions. | ||
| This method will obfuscate transaction graph, <ins>but it's not the primary use case for multiple reasons</ins> (why? what reason?). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The workflow normally required output regeneration. If Coinjoin session failed, the outputs need to be regenerated. It is hard to do with Interactive transactions because slate will need to be send to receiver once more.
Because of that for Coinjon and IT regular transaction, wallet can't allow session to fail. It is possible if the wallet will be at the end on the join chain (chain is twice larger than required) and willing to pay the extra fees. In this case, if next participant failed to process, the wallet will add fees to balance the coinjoin and publish.
So in order to make that work, wallet need to control it's position in the chain and willing to pay extra fees if something will go wrong. Or willing wait for a relatively long time.
I should probably need to add a table that will demonstrate the fees and cost to publish (attack) the coinjoin transaction.
|
|
||
| In case of Non-Interactive Transaction (NIT), this method is more easily, because ... (?) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See comment above. "If Coinjoin session failed, the outputs need to be regenerated.". NIT transaction can regenerate outputs, so it is no problem to retry.
