- XRPL developers debated prioritizing high-fee transactions to stop spam.
- One XRPL validator raised the possibility that such prioritization might increase the chances of front-running.
- Ripple’s CTO stressed the need to consider fewer liquid markets where front-running could be more problematic.
Recently, XRP Ledger Developer Wo Jake sparked a debate on X, suggesting that the network should prioritize transactions with higher fees to deter spam attacks. Jake’s tweet prompted a response asserting that such prioritization is already in place on XRPL.
Jake clarified that while fee-based prioritization is implemented for transaction validation, he believes ordering transactions by high fees could enhance network security. In particular, he argued it could be more effective against potential spammers paying fees for 10,000 transactions.
Upon Jake’s invitation, Ripple CTO David Schwartz joined the conversation. Schwartz expressed interest in the idea of prioritizing transactions by fee rate for earlier execution within a single ledger’s ordering. Meanwhile, Vet, an XRPL validator, raised a concern, suggesting that such prioritization might increase the chances of front-running.
Notably, front-running refers to using knowledge about upcoming transactions to gain an unfair advantage in the market. Schwartz acknowledged that prioritizing transactions by fee rate could make it easier for frontrunners to operate.
Furthermore, the validator stated that while front running might not be a significant issue due to slippage tolerance and liquid markets, the real question is whether the benefits outweigh the costs. While Schwartz consented to this drawback, he argued that XRPL’s lower costs and high speeds might mitigate the issue, making front-running less impactful.
Yet, the Ripple CTO stressed the need to consider fewer liquid markets where front-running could be more problematic. Besides, a crypto enthusiast pondered a scenario where fees experience exponential growth during high volume periods, causing delays for low-priority transactions.
Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.
