<p>This is most likely something on blockchain.info's end. You have a very similar call available via API to blockcypher.com here:</p>

<p><a href="https://dev.blockcypher.com/#address-endpoint" rel="nofollow">https://dev.blockcypher.com/#address-endpoint</a></p>

<p>unspentOnly=true will get you what you want.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-29T09:45:34.130Z
Thx for this answer, but `curl https://api.blockcypher.com/v1/btc/main/addrs/17wT1VgpwdWqvLza8y2AVWoiLpaLJ8XHq?unspentOnly=true` did not return the unconfirmed utxos I am looking for, even though this transaction (id: `If4cc19aa44b1f8dce6a477ccbe0cee06ff89fc3533d03ab9d3ae233dc416699c`), which is unconfirmed, should I believe result in some unconfirmed utxos... I feel like there is something I did not understand ... ?
hartmut
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-30T17:10:47.987Z
any help will be welcome
hartmut
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-08-28T21:02:31.950Z
2016-08-28T21:02:31.950Z
Jimmy Song
<p>As far as I could see, this results (for some reason I ignore) from the fact that some of the outputs of the transaction were too low (dust). All the transactions with this property seem to be treated this way. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-09-05T13:52:03.323Z
Most nodes don't relay transaction's with dust outputs, and afaik miners won't confirm them (the transactions are valid though, if a miner includes them in a block).
Murch
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-09-05T11:47:33.347Z
2016-09-05T12:10:14.773Z
2016-09-05T12:10:14.773Z
hartmut
<p>A few weeks ago, I would retrieve <strong>unconfirmed</strong> utxos from Blockchain.info doing API call <a href="https://blockchain.info/unspent?active=" rel="nofollow">https://blockchain.info/unspent?active=</a>$address. 
That enabled me to successfully make a micropayment channel (MPC) for instance. </p>

<p>Since last week however, an API call for an address with unconfirmed utxos only yields:</p>

<pre><code>{
    "notice" :"Some funds are pending confirmation and cannot be spent yet (Value 0.00412834 BTC)",
    "unspent_outputs":[

    ]
}
</code></pre>

<p>(I know it s just a matter of time before these utxos are confirmed and the issue is sorted but ... )</p>

<p>which implies my MPC will not work anymore. </p>

<p><strong>Why such a change?</strong> 
or <strong>have I gotten something wrong?</strong></p>

<p>I am considering <a href="https://blockchain.info/address/19ScG5PughZ3wNVRv1PtWsfSH7NDG4Jg5M" rel="nofollow">this</a> address. <strong>We can see the unconfirmed balance is not null, but the API returns no (unconfirmed) UTXO.</strong> </p>

<p>Thank you</p>

<api><blockchain.info><utxo>
fetching unconfirmed utxos from blockchain.info
hartmut
# fetching unconfirmed utxos from blockchain.info

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-08-28)

A few weeks ago, I would retrieve unconfirmed utxos from Blockchain.info doing API call https://blockchain.info/unspent?active=$address. 
That enabled me to successfully make a micropayment channel (MPC) for instance. 
Since last week however, an API call for an address with unconfirmed utxos only yields:
{
    "notice" :"Some funds are pending confirmation and cannot be spent yet (Value 0.00412834 BTC)",
    "unspent_outputs":[

    ]
}

(I know it s just a matter of time before these utxos are confirmed and the issue is sorted but ... )
which implies my MPC will not work anymore. 
Why such a change? 
or have I gotten something wrong?
I am considering this address. We can see the unconfirmed balance is not null, but the API returns no (unconfirmed) UTXO. 
Thank you

**Tags:** api, blockchain.info, utxo


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-08-28. Score: 4

This is most likely something on blockchain.info's end. You have a very similar call available via API to blockcypher.com here:

<https://dev.blockcypher.com/#address-endpoint>

unspentOnly=true will get you what you want.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thx for this answer, but `curl https://api.blockcypher.com/v1/btc/main/addrs/17wT1VgpwdWqvLza8y2AVWoiLpaLJ8XHq?unspentOnly=true` did not return the unconfirmed utxos I am looking for, even though this transaction (id: `If4cc19aa44b1f8dce6a477ccbe0cee06ff89fc3533d03ab9d3ae233dc416699c`), which is unconfirmed, should I believe result in some unconfirmed utxos... I feel like there is something I did not understand ... ?  
> **username_0**: any help will be welcome  

---

### Answer by username_0 on 2016-09-05. Score: 0

As far as I could see, this results (for some reason I ignore) from the fact that some of the outputs of the transaction were too low (dust). All the transactions with this property seem to be treated this way.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Most nodes don't relay transaction's with dust outputs, and afaik miners won't confirm them (the transactions are valid though, if a miner includes them in a block).  

---

