routing nodes dont make economic sense i think. services can link directly with each other and serve their own liquidity needs and be a network router as well
Profitable routing nodes are arbitraging the price of liquidity. But low sell high. There will always be opportunities to make a sat. But the largest nodes are service providers who route only as a byproduct of having public channels.
true. but using a node makes sense and occasionally routing as a benefit also makes sense so in that case all nodes with public channels are routing nodes. locking up utxo just to route isn't much sense now
Are there bigger issues around channel liquidity incentives? I have heard others channels only barely scraping by. What is the most sustainable model moving forward?
Zero Fee isn't sustainable. Even with his model of selling the liquidity upfront, it doesn't incentive the long term maintenance of the channel.
routing nodes dont make economic sense i think. services can link directly with each other and serve their own liquidity needs and be a network router as well
Profitable routing nodes are arbitraging the price of liquidity. But low sell high. There will always be opportunities to make a sat. But the largest nodes are service providers who route only as a byproduct of having public channels.
true. but using a node makes sense and occasionally routing as a benefit also makes sense so in that case all nodes with public channels are routing nodes. locking up utxo just to route isn't much sense now
Are there bigger issues around channel liquidity incentives? I have heard others channels only barely scraping by. What is the most sustainable model moving forward?
Nitter: https://nitter.it/zerofeerouting/status/1586053522029936641
Are there any alternatives with a similar model?
Thank you for your service, sir