pull down to refresh
@RocketNode
stacking since: #401806
42 sats \ 0 replies \ @RocketNode 27 Aug \ on: "To force close or not to force close, This is the question." - LND & ThunderHub lightning
FC fee is pre-negotiated (and renegotiated often while both sides are online). Your node has a signed commitment tx that will be broadcasted when you decide to FC. Coop closes requires both sides to be online to negotiate a fee and sign the tx.
19 sats \ 0 replies \ @RocketNode 24 Aug \ parent \ on: Why happen force closures on LN channels? bitcoin
Reserve is to make sure the opener has enough balance on their side to allow for the commitment fee to grow. You have to account for the tx size of all outputs which can constantly change, anchor + balances + inflight htlcs, x fee rate.
FCs happen when one party deems their balance as not safe. Usually this means a htlc has not been settled and expired. This could allow anyone with the preimage to steal it. However, each lightning implementation has criterias for going on chain. The massive fee change could be seen as an attack because if the commitment fee is too low, the mempool could be full where the commitment tx fee would be below the min relay fee rate. This could prevent the FC making it to the miners so neither side would be able to CPFP.
The question I see often is why FC?
The actual balances for each side of the channel can only be settled on chain. So when one side sees something they don’t like, they can broadcast the latest commitment tx provided from the other side. According to Matt, fee mismatches “could” be an attack and thus decide to go on chain to be safe. This is why most of the FCs from the recent fee spike were initiated by LDK nodes.
I highly suggest reading Elle’s write up on lightning channel operations. It’s very long and detailed. https://ellemouton.com/posts/normal-operation-pre-taproot/
Here's a
jq command to get all the channels with discountslncli describegraph | jq -r '.edges[] | (select((.node2_policy.custom_records."55555" != null) and (.node2_policy.custom_records."55555" != "0000000000000000") or (.node1_policy.custom_records."55555" != null) and (.node1_policy.custom_records."55555" != "0000000000000000"))) | .channel_id'Currently showing 5 (of 16 nodes on 0.18) with discounts
See OCEAN’s config - https://ocean.xyz/docs/datafreepolicy
I’m waiting for block 840000 to be mined by OCEAN or an empty AntPool. Both are overdue (just over 1k blocks since either has happened 838886/838906).
I still have an offline setup that I use regularly. But my main use case is for when I leave this world. No one in my family would be able to understand my setup and recover anything.
Need.. probably not. Since 2014ish, I've always signed txs from an air gapped device (outside of lightning's hot wallet).
Nodes do not have to publish/announce an URI. There are a few nodes that don’t want anyone to peer with them (ie Binance).
If you only have a few M sats, I wouldn’t worry about it. But as you grow your stack, upgrade to a BTC only hardware wallet.
Want to maximize fiat > sats? Buy sats. May never get ROI unless electricity is ~free.
But I would suggest getting a s9 and playing around with it first. s17 puts ROI even further away (especially at 110v) at 8x the cost. I run both around 1000W and the s17 is about 2.5x the hash rate of the s9.