> Yes, but it still limits how much damage each peer can do to the node.
> And I think you overstate the ease of distributed denial of service attacks,
> and the relative resource consumption differences on an attacker simulating
> multiple nodes versus one simulating a single node.
So assume the
> benefit. Use of MUST (in RFC 2119 sense) invites lazy thought in the protocol
> design itself, where details need not be sold as beneficial to individuals. We
> should say, there is no RFC
> 2119 MUST - there is only self interest.
I think you are misreading the intent behind RFC2119 a bit... T
> You impose this 25 channels per peer. I start opening a channel to
> you. Because I did not check mempool or because my fee-estimation algo is
> bad, I pay too low a fee. I become impatient and bump it up, which you
> perceive as another open (so it is now 2/25 channels).
It seems, to
