hm i finally wrapped my head around what's happening with bip-110
@Piotr here's the rundown:
it basically doesn't affect monetary transactions. they get relayed on both sides.
the spammy ones, won't be mined by bip-110 enforcing nodes. wallets will have to broadcast harder to get them to arrive at miners whose mempools don't reject them.
bip-110 enforcing nodes don't reject the blocks with spam in them, they just will not spend from the spammy utxos if they are used by a miner, ie, the transactions will propagate a bit more slowly to find nodes that are relaying them. once they do, they will persist until someone mines them or the mempool prunes them out due to age.
i'm not sure what any of this achieves but i just don't like the fact that bip-110 influencoors now become the gatekeepers for uasf for nodes. spam or no, it's prejudicial against *user activated soft forks*. i mean, same same, it's not like core has been famous for being nice towards uasf ever, including the original inception of segwit which used the technique for the first time, users made transactions, and miners upgraded them because exchanges were accepting them and thus there was fees dangling like carrots.
so, in summary, nothing really happens if you are just using bitcoin for onchain spends or opening lightning channels. it's only if you want to make ordinals and such that anything will be different, and even then, at best it maybe delays a transaction getting into a block sometimes. i suppose core will already be accounting for this in their wallet broadcast so that they preferentially send to nodes that aren't running bip-110 but mostly it's just a mass action about mempool.
really nothing to be concerned about. no coins will be lost. there will not be a fork. it remains to be see what effect it has on the running 12% or so of block space being occupied by these spammy transactions.
