> On Jun 28, 2022, at 19:11, Peter Todd wrote:
>
> Idle question: would it be worthwhile to allow people to opt-in to their
> payments happening more slowly for privacy? At the very least it'd be fine if
> payments done by automation for rebalancing, etc. happened slowly.
Yea, actually, I
Matt Corallo writes:
> On 6/28/22 9:05 AM, Christian Decker wrote:
>> It is worth mentioning here that the LN protocol is generally not very
>> latency sensitive, and from my experience can easily handle very slow
>> signers (3-5 seconds delay) without causing too many issues, aside from
>>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:31:54AM -0400, Matt Corallo wrote:
> On 6/28/22 9:05 AM, Christian Decker wrote:
> > It is worth mentioning here that the LN protocol is generally not very
> > latency sensitive, and from my experience can easily handle very slow
> > signers (3-5 seconds delay) without
On 6/28/22 9:05 AM, Christian Decker wrote:
It is worth mentioning here that the LN protocol is generally not very
latency sensitive, and from my experience can easily handle very slow
signers (3-5 seconds delay) without causing too many issues, aside from
slower forwards in case we are
Olaoluwa Osuntokun writes:
>> Rene Pickhardt brought up the issue of latency with regards to
>> nested/recursive MuSig2 (or nested FROST for threshold) on Bitcoin
>> StackExchange
>
> Not explicitly, but that strikes me as more of an implementation level
> concern. As an example, today more nodes
Thanks for the summary Laolu, very informative.
> One other cool topic that came up is the concept of leveraging recursive
> musig2 (so musig2 within musig2) to make channels even _more_ multi-sigy.
A minor point but terminology can get frustratingly sticky if it isn't agreed
on early. Can we
Hi Michael,
> A minor point but terminology can get frustratingly sticky if it isn't
> agreed on early. Can we refer to it as nested MuSig2 going
> forward rather than recursive MuSig2?
No strong feelings on my end, the modifier _nested_ is certainly a bit less
loaded and conceptually simpler,
Hey Zman and list,
I don't think waxwing's proposal will help us for private gossip.
The rate-limiting it provides doesn't seem to be enough in our case.
The proposal rate-limits token issuance to once every N blocks where
N is the age of the utxo to which we prove ownership of. Once the token
is
> ## Lightning Gossip
>
> # Gossip V2: Now Or Later?
> A proposal for the "re-design the entire thing" was floated in the past by
> Rusty [6]. It does away with the strict coupling of channels to channel
> announcements, and instead moves them to the _node_ level. Each node would
> then
Hi y'all,
Last week nearly 30 (!) Lightning developers and researchers gathered in
Oakland, California for three day to discuss a number of matters related to
the current state and evolution of the protocol. This time around, we had
much better representation for all the major Lightning Node
10 matches
Mail list logo
