<p>There is effectively no population of nodes besides Bitcoin Core.</p>
<p>No logic exists to rebroadcast other people's transactions.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-28T00:14:12.007Z
There are some non-Bitcoin Core nodes: https://coin.dance/nodes#allNodes Since even one node could rebroadcast such transactions, I think the behavior of other implementations is germane, even if there aren't many on the network.
Casey Rodarmor
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-28T00:15:18.853Z
The link shows perhaps 15, total. There's no meaningful population of them.
Claris
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-28T00:12:22.690Z
2021-02-28T00:12:22.690Z
Claris
<p>So far, Bitcoin Core rebroadcasting is a wallet-level responsibility. Transactions that aren't relevant to any of the Bitcoin Core's internal wallet are not rebroadcast at all.</p>
<p>There is work to change that: <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21061" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21061</a>. This makes sense, as right now, observing a rebroadcast is a very clear sign that the transaction belongs to the wallet, which is a privacy leak.</p>
<p>So I think in short the answer is: yes, it makes sense, but so far it hasn't been done.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-02-28T00:17:23.827Z
2021-02-28T00:17:23.827Z
Pieter Wuille
<p>If a transaction is sent and dropped from the default mempool before it is included in a block, but nodes with a larger-than-default mempool size exist that still have the transaction, will those nodes retransmit that transaction eventually?</p>
<p>This is a matter of policy, so different Bitcoin implementations may have different behaviors. I'm most curious about Bitcoin Core, since it's very common, but if other node implementations differ, I'm curious about them too.</p>
<p>If such transactions aren't retransmitted, I'm also curious why not, since it seems like such behavior might be useful.</p>

<unconfirmed-transactions><mempool><broadcast>
Will nodes configured with a larger-than-default mempool automatically retransmit transactions that have been dropped from the default mempool?
Casey Rodarmor
# Will nodes configured with a larger-than-default mempool automatically retransmit transactions that have been dropped from the default mempool?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-02-28)

If a transaction is sent and dropped from the default mempool before it is included in a block, but nodes with a larger-than-default mempool size exist that still have the transaction, will those nodes retransmit that transaction eventually?

This is a matter of policy, so different Bitcoin implementations may have different behaviors. I'm most curious about Bitcoin Core, since it's very common, but if other node implementations differ, I'm curious about them too.

If such transactions aren't retransmitted, I'm also curious why not, since it seems like such behavior might be useful.

**Tags:** unconfirmed-transactions, mempool, broadcast


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2021-02-28. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

So far, Bitcoin Core rebroadcasting is a wallet-level responsibility. Transactions that aren't relevant to any of the Bitcoin Core's internal wallet are not rebroadcast at all.

There is work to change that: <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21061>. This makes sense, as right now, observing a rebroadcast is a very clear sign that the transaction belongs to the wallet, which is a privacy leak.

So I think in short the answer is: yes, it makes sense, but so far it hasn't been done.


---

### Answer by username_1 on 2021-02-28. Score: -1

There is effectively no population of nodes besides Bitcoin Core.

No logic exists to rebroadcast other people's transactions.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: There are some non-Bitcoin Core nodes: https://coin.dance/nodes#allNodes Since even one node could rebroadcast such transactions, I think the behavior of other implementations is germane, even if there aren't many on the network.  
> **username_1**: The link shows perhaps 15, total. There's no meaningful population of them.  

---

