If your coinjoin implementation relies on parameters that aren't part of consensus rules...

Maybe your implementation is shit and needs to be updated

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

May i have more context? What did I miss?

Some of whirlpool's coinjoin transactions are being filtered by ocean's Bitcoin node. Samourai and others are calling it censorship, but Luke Dashjr is saying it's not intentional or targeted at coinjoin, but some coinjoin transactions do not fall within certain consensus rules, and consequently get filtered.

Consensus rules are different from local node policies

Correct, a good coinjoin looks like any other txn

All implementations (joinmarket,joinstr,whirlpool,wasabi) have their unique on chain footprint

Couldn't be more wrong.

Ser how many mixes do you recommend to effectively break links? Haven’t gotten any good answers.

Just one is fine

Thank you. The join implemented on Sparrow check out?

Yep, but be careful with your bad bank

I do 10+, because low time preference.

You would think

"Consensus" neq "what all nodes will propagate"

"Consensus" EQ "what all nodes will accept in a block"

Large op_returns don't violate consensus.