Jump to content
Lightning Bitcoin
Sign in to follow this  
Matt Jackson

[Proposal] Dynamic Fees System

Recommended Posts

[Proposal Content] Implement Dynamic Fees System

[Proposer] Matt Jackson

[Proposal Issue Time] 2018-09-21

[Proposal Voting Period] 2018/10/08 --2018/10/19

 

Dear LBTC Community, 

Congratulations on launching the Spark governance system! A small step for human kind, but a big step for LBTC community! On-chain governance has always been a hot debate for the blockchain community. However, only a few projects are determined to make it happen. I am glad that LBTC is in the same league of Decred and Tezos. 

As a hardcore LBTC supporter, I have a few thoughts on the direction of the project going forward. Lightning Bitcoin is known as a very cheap way to make a payment. Currently, Transactions fees are a flat 0.01 LBTC, paid to the 101 delegates who run the nodes. It is very affordable now, but could get more expensive once the network has more applications running in the future. 

I propose that the LBTC team should work on a dynamic fee system that will reduce the fee considerably based on the usage.

The fundamental idea behind the dynamic fees system: 

Transactions will no longer have a fixed fee depending on the type. A global minimum fee will be set as a constant in the protocol. This minimum fee will be reflective to the amount of LBTC per byte (size) used by transactions (LBTC/byte). Any users would be able to submit transactions as long as the fee they use is higher or equal to the minimum fee. After adopting this system, LBTC will have a free fee market in which the fees will be dynamic and self-adjusted depending on the situation of the network. 

In order to achieve this goal, the team would need to design a fee estimate algorithm to provide estimations depending on the transaction type, the recent status of the network and the priority of the transaction. This algorithm would be implemented to guide users regarding their chosen fees to be paid. 


I hope the committee would seriously consider this proposal because it will lead LBTC to a more promising development path and make the LBTC ecosystem prosper. 

-Truly yours

Matt
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strongly support!  we all know the system would handle more issue with the development of LBTC,so that  we need a dynamic system to  o adapt to different size transaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×