pull down to refresh
419 sats \ 7 replies \ @DarthCoin 22 Feb 2023 \ on: AMA: Ask Murch Anything bitcoin
- What would you do to improve LN as it is today?
- Do you think would be able to have an option for LN channels that we can set a specific block height until the channel will remain open? (In some way to prevent random force closures, for many reasons). Of course the option must be agreed by both sides of the channel.
I’m a big fan of LN-Symmetry (aka Eltoo) and the derived variants. I’m looking forward to it getting much easier to have channels with more than two participants and the removal of the toxic outdated channel states. I guess that’s already on the way and just a matter of time, though. The biggest hurdle is presumably the consensus change to add
SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT.I don’t think it’s possible to force a channel to remain open, in the sense that it must be operational until a specific date. Ultimately, the channel co-owner can simply not cooperate to create new updates, so even if they cannot close the channel, they can force inactivity.
reply
So how can be improved the protocol to have less force closures.
Yes, I know that most the fault is from each user, in which conditions they run their nodes. But something maybe could be improved in the protocol, so we can have less force closed channels.
Soon will be a fortune to pay for opening/closing channels.
reply
I guess some force closures are due to subtle differences in how implementations handle disagreements on channel parameters, while others are due to node operators’ expectations not being aligned. I would expect both to naturally recede over time, as node operators homogenize expectations or learn to better check in advance whether they are a good fit for a shared channel, and implementations improve interoperability. I don’t perceive the protocol itself as a major source of force closures.
reply
I guess also, there were a lot of people that were just experimenting and dabbling with Lightning Nodes so that there was a large population of nodes that were just not well maintained. As implementations mature, less effort will need to be put into maintaining a node’s health, but also, the cost of operating a node in conjunction with the risk of having funds in a hot wallet will probably serve to dissuade ill-maintained nodes over time.
reply
Yes, I have the same "feeling" and from what I see/listen from many noobs talking with them, this is the main issue for these FC.
Thanks for your insight.
reply
reply
Yes, I was listening that episode! Really good stuff.
reply