https://xcancel.com/OrangeSurfBTC/status/1968293577362145485

nitter

Stacker Saloon

saloon

Very cool work by @daniela (https://stacker.news/items/1227022/r/Scoresby)

# Reported minimum relay fees

| MinRelayFee | Nodes 10/09 | Nodes 15/09 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1 sat/vB | 25,125 (89.0%) | 24,695 (86.5%) |
| No FEEFILTER sent| 2,135 (7.6%)| 2,331 (8.2%) |
| 0.1 sat/vB | 569 (2.0%) | 1105 (3.9%) |
| 9170997[^1] | 84 (0.3%) | 73 (0.3%) |
| .001 sat/vB | 81 (0.3%) | 91 (0.3%) |

[^1]: @0xB10C thinks these nodes were doing IBD or were not caught up to the chain tip in some way. 

I'm surprised that so much of the network (~87%) is still at 1 sat/vB, especially considering that we are seeing almost 40% of all transactions having a sub-1 sat/vB feerate.

![](https://m.stacker.news/108540)
[source](https://x.com/OrangeSurfBTC/status/1968293577362145485)

I suppose the nofeefilter set nodes may also be relaying transactions, although I suspect they would be using the default of whatever client they are running. Core 29 I think is the only version that has a lower default than 1 sat/vB.

# 4% of nodes having a more permissive policy leads to sub-1 sat/vB transactions being 40% of all transactions. 

MinRelayFee	Nodes 10/09	Nodes 15/09
1 sat/vB	25,125 (89.0%)	24,695 (86.5%)
No FEEFILTER sent	2,135 (7.6%)	2,331 (8.2%)
0.1 sat/vB	569 (2.0%)	1105 (3.9%)
9170997¹	84 (0.3%)	73 (0.3%)
.001 sat/vB	81 (0.3%)	91 (0.3%)

Reported minimum relay fees

4% of nodes having a more permissive policy leads to sub-1 sat/vB transactions being 40% of all transactions.

Footnotes