add n30239 notes and questions

_posts/2024-11-06-#30239.md

@@ -10,18 +10,36 @@ status: upcoming
 commit:
 ---
 
-_Notes and questions to follow soon!_
-
-<!-- TODO: Before meeting, add notes and questions
 ## Notes
 
+- Bitcoin Core considers a transaction output to be [dust](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10986/what-is-meant-by-bitcoin-dust) when its value is lower than the cost of creating and spending it. These outputs may be useful in particular circumstances, e.g. L2s, when the parent transaction cannot have fees for technical or accounting reasons.
 
+- Recommend reading from earlier review clubs:
+  - [#30352: Add PayToAnchor(P2A), OP 1 <0x4e73> as standard output script for spending](https://bitcoincore.reviews/30352)
 
 ## Questions
 
 1. Did you review the PR? [Concept ACK, approach ACK, tested ACK, or NACK](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#peer-review)? What was your review approach?
--->
 
+1. Where in code is it determined if an amount is dust?
+
+1. Is dust restricted by consensus? Policy? Both?
+
+1. How can dust be problematic?
+
+1. What is _ephemeral_ dust?
+
+1. What are the specific proposed rules for ephemeral dust?
+
+1. Why is it important to impose a fee restriction?
+
+1. How are 1P1C relay and TRUC transactions relevant to ephemeral dust?
+
+1. What could happen if restrictions on the the child tx were not in place?
+
+1. Why is the test in [this commit](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30239/commits/fd22f9e2f4709a00bd31b739a7edadf98a728831) important?
+
+1. Could a miner choose to mine transactions containing dust? Is this a concern?
 
 <!-- TODO: After a meeting, uncomment and add meeting log between the irc tags
 ## Meeting Log