Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

Yes, that's what I'm suggesting, but I don't know if it's right or not. I was assuming many small channels would be partially self regulating because people would have to pay for more on chain transaction fees for the opening and closing of the channels. Andy Schroder On 01/02/2018 08:11

Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

Mark Friedenbach writes: > I had always assumed the protocol limits were training wheels, and would be > shocked and dismayed if that were not the case (and would immediately begin > work on an alternative fork because such limits would make lightning useless > for my

Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

Andy Schroder writes: > I understand that you have to be in agreement with your direct peers. So > you don't really care about what agreements others in your route may > have in place? I would think that you would choose not to route through > hops that violate your

Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

e: Good morning Daniel, Original Message ---- Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels Local Time: December 27, 2017 10:30 PM UTC Time: December 27, 2017 2:30 PM From: therealsanga...@gmail.com To: ZmnSCPxj <zmnsc...@protonmail.com> Andy Schroder <i...@and

Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

gt; > On 12/27/2017 03:13 PM, ZmnSCPxj wrote: > >Good morning Daniel, > > > > > > > >> Original Message > >>Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels > >>Local Time: December 27, 2017 10:30 PM > >>

Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

al Message Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels Local Time: December 27, 2017 10:30 PM UTC Time: December 27, 2017 2:30 PM From: therealsanga...@gmail.com To: ZmnSCPxj <zmnsc...@protonmail.com> Andy Schroder <i...@andyschroder.com>, lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundati

Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

Good morning Andy, > Andy Schroder > > On 12/27/2017 12:18 AM, Andy Schroder wrote: > >>> Channel closing >>> costs dwarf the gains to be made from cheating, however. >>> Since millisatoshis is used, is there a maximum channel funding size? >>> >>> Yes, the upper 32 bits must be zero, from

Re: [Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

Andy Schroder On 12/27/2017 12:18 AM, Andy Schroder wrote: Channel closing costs dwarf the gains to be made from cheating, however. Since millisatoshis is used, is there a maximum channel funding size? Yes, the upper 32 bits must be zero, from BOLT #2: - for channels with `chain_hash`

[Lightning-dev] General questions about channels

What's the rational for using millisatoshis as the units for lightning channels? Aren't you going to loose up to 1/2 of a satoshi when the channel is closed? Is this because it doesn't hurt and you might as well be open to the opportunity for these sub satoshi transactions, because if you