pull down to refresh
155 sats \ 4 replies \ @nikotsla 23 Mar \ on: c-otto.de routing node history with a bit of data lightning
It is a long run! How you stay motivated? Any insight to share? I see for example:
- Less than 80 channels.
You hit the sweet spot in this regards?
- Big channel with the usual players
The only profitable way to run a routing node right now is this? Big channels to big players and don't sell to normal noderunners?
Motivation is a tricky beast. There have been times where I read every single log line as it flew by, trying to understand the details, optimizing stuff. There have been times (more recently) where I simply don't look at any information of the node, aside from "is it still running". Nowadays, I just do what feels right, without any plan. If my motivation drops too low, I'll close the node. Luckily, there's a lot of automation going on behind the scenes, so my motivation would need to drop quite a lot.
I stopped opening channels to new peers a while ago, mainly because I haven't figured out how to find good peers. I experimented quite a bit over the years, sometimes with success, but not in a satisfactory and organized manner. Due to the size/popularity of my node, I get lots of channels from (for me) new peers, and I just keep those that are worth it. I need to take good care of my sats, and having them sit idle in useless channels isn't worth it - which is why the number of channels might be rather low. The channels that remain, however, are good (or new).
If I take a closer look at the top channels while including bidirection traffic (i.e. incoming traffic also counts as "good" if it leaves through a channel where I charge fees), the top nodes for the past 60 days are, sorted by profitability with the best peer listed first:
- Binance
- fixedfloat.com
- LOOP
- LNBiG.com Edge 4
- LNBiG.com Hub 1
- LNBiG.com Hub 3
- Strike
- cyberdyne.sh
- adam.masterofpearls.net
- Net Neutrality
I guess you could say that larger nodes are better. Keep in mind, though, that not all large nodes are good peers. I've cut some ties, and I will cut more.
Regarding profitability: keep in mind that this involves quite a bit of risk (hot wallet, "beta" software). Furthermore, running a routing node takes quite a bit of skill. If this were an established industry, my salary would be more than what any reasonable node could earn - risk and other costs aside. It's a hobby. I'm fine with smaller nodes as peers, but ultimately, they tend to hog my sats more than larger nodes do.
reply
To add to this:
ACINQ, bfx-lnd0, bfx-lnd1, okx and kraken didn't make it to the top 10, even though I have/had channels with those peers, too. Size alone isn't enough, there needs to be demand, which Binance seems to have quite a lot of.
I'd say the best reason to run a node in the lightning network, taking into account the risk and all costs, is to actually use it. Businesses that depend on their node, or at least provide a decent benefit to their users by offering LN, don't need to care about the overhead. They earn money using some other means.