Did someone write about that and I missed it?
100 sats \ 3 replies \ @jeff 18 Feb
Yah, I brought it up a couple times in the past -- but seems impossible for you to keep tabs on all ideas.
See the section called "Waaaay more control over zaps flow" in #412066.
The tl;dr of what I've written in the past is - a territory owner, should be able to standup an endpoint, that they give that to SN in config. Then, for every zap, the endpoint gets as much context for the zap as possible, and the endpoint determines the weights and destination for the zap.
reply
@k00b, I screwed up the link. I meant here:
See the section called "Waaaay more control over zaps flow" in #412084.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @jeff 18 Feb
See also, #20874
reply
I've bookmarked them. I remember your post about ~econ but missed the other one (or it was just so long ago).
I love the underlying why for the idea. I agree there's something there. I'll let it brew for a bit.
reply