diff options
| author | Joseph Poon <joseph@lightning.network> | 2015-08-09 22:01:03 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-08-10 05:01:19 +0000 |
| commit | 56046b9cf4a24b423e491dcdd910b039abd9430c (patch) | |
| tree | 12f95f29b3cc2b1c06737e927f701eaaa9be3231 | |
| parent | 556951e110964449e20a031f3e2311990931ba3e (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-56046b9cf4a24b423e491dcdd910b039abd9430c.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-56046b9cf4a24b423e491dcdd910b039abd9430c.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Off-chain transactions and miner fees
| -rw-r--r-- | 37/74e3805622b08e908e37fb57a93775a39ece8c | 114 |
1 files changed, 114 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/37/74e3805622b08e908e37fb57a93775a39ece8c b/37/74e3805622b08e908e37fb57a93775a39ece8c new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d1854d3f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/37/74e3805622b08e908e37fb57a93775a39ece8c @@ -0,0 +1,114 @@ +Return-Path: <joseph@lightning.network> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 400408D5 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 10 Aug 2015 05:01:19 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-pa0-f53.google.com (mail-pa0-f53.google.com + [209.85.220.53]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 415ECEA + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 10 Aug 2015 05:01:18 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by pacrr5 with SMTP id rr5so95062253pac.3 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Sun, 09 Aug 2015 22:01:18 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=lightning.network; s=google; + h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version + :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to; + bh=ftFbjwNrmZsdPNg09tQFbS+oePQ4rdJ4Cq8uVJIdJGA=; + b=Um/KiOCiNcC1YmggQyWJd6OUm/O7bk2DydFGV5yMuHpFCbL9rP4YEmMNAmaCKK5CTk + 8u+junmMU2H3+6CMsbidr2j4YeZ4kluTu64dOmdg8wIjuJaS5/B34HXMSveiyK+1zeN1 + qwFsygF8irlC2xmtPXOucqkDgZ+cXEXKBi9PY= +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20130820; + h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references + :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to; + bh=ftFbjwNrmZsdPNg09tQFbS+oePQ4rdJ4Cq8uVJIdJGA=; + b=E7AnI13CIukZkUPXPxYP98o3Dyzq5KV7iBHVwbItkUeQnvdcVCz+887v/qp9T2VHi/ + aFKL+lUOyvwIbEm/n/cYNsmjkSfTh2KVm7RGOYuQbnmlbqmJnpZ3hj7ZEIXutrZNzCde + vX5fkn4VugYhi6rqR/NT3VtVYL/T0oqrf3MuE9/XDHW3194PZLoKGmqQCs8RDfpdqk/T + I2RIFLmUKkEzbJuF7K/JrPezYqjF9bvvPEUMUfOcHhJW/n68Y7FENBp4EDdaE1b8EGgM + LUzK1UA/kv6CYyubQaibd+R8mIpzWCd6nMvyvQ7rJE4kXHgh+EfcJLbdGq3masxTo0aB + q5BA== +X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQklYtaW+evX2V7KI+7kt72uFtabmzyTjVDm52X2U+seUEu7ZE7jZXZcNVFpFF8jNloWsLLu +X-Received: by 10.68.249.66 with SMTP id ys2mr41305085pbc.82.1439182877957; + Sun, 09 Aug 2015 22:01:17 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from localhost ([209.141.33.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id + ex1sm18230883pdb.57.2015.08.09.22.01.17 + (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); + Sun, 09 Aug 2015 22:01:17 -0700 (PDT) +Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 22:01:03 -0700 +From: Joseph Poon <joseph@lightning.network> +To: "info@bitmarkets.net" <info@bitmarkets.net> +Message-ID: <20150810050103.GD1758@lightning.network> +References: <55C7D234.1040306@bitmarkets.net> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <55C7D234.1040306@bitmarkets.net> +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, LOTS_OF_MONEY, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Off-chain transactions and miner fees +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 05:01:19 -0000 + +Hi, + +On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 12:20:36AM +0200, info--- via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> Off-chain transactions, whether it's Lightning or something else, +> potentially extract fees, which may otherwise be paid to miners, if the +> transactions were actually on-chain. +> +> In this context, wouldn't it be contradictory, maybe even harmful, to +> aim for an environment, where some/many/most transactions are off-chain? + +I think the fee market's long-term implications for mining rewards is +very important as well! However, opening and closing channels will not +be infrequent to the point that it will never happen with Lightning. +Individuals that fill up their channel will need to accommodate +accumulation (as well as those that do a lot of disbursement). These +fund flows are not too rare, and huge payments (think the equivalent to +wire transfers today) will probably be still on-chain. I think the +payment size of micropayments to credit cards are Lightning-scale, what +people use today for wire transfers (e.g. buying a house) will be +on-chain. + +What Lightning does is it mitigates the advantages that doing an end-run +around bitcoin entirely via centralized systems provides to a sufficient +level, e.g. everyone transacting on Coinbase. Having everything on +centralized services will have significantly lower on-chain transactions +than Lightning and is one of the more viable alternative off-chain +payments. + +Fundamentally, without off-chain transactions, there's a paradox within +a viable fee market. If you presume that fees should be relatively +competitive (i.e. not asymptotically close to zero), that implies that +higher-value transactions *will* be prioritized over low-value +transactions, as high-value transactions are willing to pay higher fees. +Wire transfers are cheap when it's a million-dollar wire. + +In my view, different transaction values is the much larger risk for +on-chain transaction fee markets, with high-value transactions crowding +out low-value transactions on-chain. With lightning, it significantly +mitigates this problem by aggregating the low-value transactions +off-chain. + +-- +Joseph Poon + |