# Great Consensus Cleanup Revival

**URL:** <https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710>\
**Category:** Protocol Design\
**Created:** [March 24, 2024, 5:29pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710 "2024-03-24T17:29:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 85

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AntoineP](https://delvingbitcoin.org/user_avatar/delvingbitcoin.org/antoinep/32/483_2.png) [@AntoineP](https://delvingbitcoin.org/u/AntoineP)\
**Post date:** [April 21, 2025, 2:21pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710/85 "2025-04-21T14:21:14Z")

</div>

I’m moving a conceptual discussion from the BIP PR to this thread. There, Luke Dashjr [pointed out](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1800#discussion_r2029450291) that since the nLockTime field is serialized at the very end of a transaction, it makes for a good extranonce. Luke has not provided any details so it’s difficult to address his objection precisely, but i can’t think of a realistic situation where not being able to roll the nLockTime would be a significant issue for a miner.

---

_[View the full topic](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710)._