Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2024-01-01 Thread jlspc via Lightning-dev
Hi Eric, I agree that users can pay miners offchain and miners can create blocks where the difference between inputs and outputs exceeds the fees paid (by mining their own transactions). I model that behavior as dishonest mining. Onchain fees seem to reflect congestion for now, but it's true

Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2024-01-01 Thread David A. Harding
On 2023-12-28 08:06, jlspc via bitcoin-dev wrote: On Friday, December 22nd, 2023 at 8:36 AM, Nagaev Boris wrote: To validate a transaction with FDT [...] a light client would have to determine the median fee rate of the recent blocks. To do that without involving trust, it has to download the

Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2024-01-01 Thread jlspc via Lightning-dev
Hi Boris, Responses inline below: Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Friday, December 22nd, 2023 at 8:36 AM, Nagaev Boris wrote: > Hi John! > > I have two questions regarding the window, which are related. > > 1. Why is the window aligned? IIUC, this means that the blocks mined >

Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2024-01-01 Thread Eric Voskuil
Hi John,Honest is a misnomer, which is underpinning the concept. There is nothing dishonest about such payments. The downside is that the payer forgoes anonymity relative to the miner, but this is not dishonest, nor is mining one’s own transactions (where the represented “fee” implies nothing).

Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2024-01-01 Thread jlspc via Lightning-dev
Hi Antoine, Thanks for your thoughtful response. Comments inline below: > Hi John, > While the idea of using sliding reaction window for blockchain congestion > detection has been present in the "smart contract" space at large [0] and > this has been discussed informally among Lightning devs

Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2024-01-01 Thread Eric Voskuil
The fees paid to mine the set of transactions in a given block are known only to the miner that produced the block. Assuming that tx inputs less outputs represents an actual economic force is an error.eOn Dec 22, 2023, at 09:24, jlspc via bitcoin-dev wrote:Hi Antoine, Thanks for your thoughtful

Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2024-01-01 Thread Nagaev Boris
Hi John! I have two questions regarding the window, which are related. 1. Why is the window aligned? IIUC, this means that the blocks mined since the latest block whose height is divisible by window_size do not affect transaction's validity. So a recent change of fees does not reflect if a

Re: [Lightning-dev] [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning Safely With Feerate-Dependent Timelocks

2023-12-18 Thread Antoine Riard
Hi John, While the idea of using sliding reaction window for blockchain congestion detection has been present in the "smart contract" space at large [0] and this has been discussed informally among Lightning devs and covenant designers few times [1] [2], this is the first and best formalization