1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
|
Return-Path: <jlspc@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4D4C0032
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Sep 2023 00:56:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1BC60ACF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Sep 2023 00:56:30 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 7D1BC60ACF
Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com
header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=TFIjKLQK
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id pt1oU81XDKMW
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Sep 2023 00:56:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-41104.protonmail.ch (mail-41104.protonmail.ch
[185.70.41.104])
by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC33760F46
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 17 Sep 2023 00:56:29 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org DC33760F46
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail3; t=1694912178; x=1695171378;
bh=rNGY5f4YJIAu5o7uH3rwlaf8f11Wto5Fvmr/xRafT00=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:
Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
Message-ID:BIMI-Selector;
b=TFIjKLQKGtIEFessc0VFpdaOREBC9WK6EVSaB7tok5XMI5l/+o0y1zp9OQwxU3AIp
2wh7Va9troQ75birIlweeJ1hFsshrd2IbNdO39ZmlyO8cru9mHxfna0WGakx9ePzuv
zd5BPmO78EKHd/82kHqdlseW6hueqb+DquZ8WAtmNCfV2Wo4duLM4DICaoKjCOUIdW
fewDwSpHYDqNXN+Cs6iqouj741vdrBR9U3vt8rxblEbhxqn+eYDwo3+V646Vsg7goS
tNbHJuGMGl+e3V5Rx7GKN1Gbu93Gmr68wHWLHANfGt5IxlM5kYdnBdYGSgjTDOaVMc
NXnyCQ4sD2qkg==
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2023 00:56:04 +0000
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
From: jlspc <jlspc@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <djxZBOI49yXSwCjEVPVoBipCliOadhstw8fwfUja4m8bVM3AN79d5luAsXJiva1f8sE0_kXRyLIcv0E_9Wqbwba71woBw3hTehWOQ5JzJ74=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87bke9a23j.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
References: <vUfA21-18moEP9UiwbWvzpwxxn83yJQ0J4YsnzK4iQGieArfWPpIZblsVs1yxEs9NBpqoMBISuufMsckbuWXZE1qkzXkf36oJKfwDVqQ2as=@protonmail.com>
<87bke9a23j.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Feedback-ID: 36436663:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 17 Sep 2023 08:43:51 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
"lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
<lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Lightning With Simple Covenants
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Sun, 17 Sep 2023 00:56:32 -0000
Hi Rusty,
> I've read the start of the paper on my vacation, and am still
> digesting it. But even so far, it presents some delightful
> possibilities.
Great!
> As with some other proposals, it's worth noting that the cost of
> enforcement is dramatically increased. It's no longer one or two txs,
> it's 10+. If the "dedicated user" contributes some part of the expected
> fee, the capital efficiency is reduced (and we're back to "how much is
> enough?").
Yes, this is certainly an issue, and it affects both settling the channel o=
n-chain and resolving HTLCS on-chain.
The paper has a few ideas about how "short-cut" transactions could be used =
to address the cost of enforcing HTLCs on-chain.
It may be possible to do something similar for the channel itself, but that=
's more complex because of the value included in the channel and the potent=
ial for channels with different capacities in a single timeout-tree.
> But worst case (dramatic dedicated user failure) it's only a 2x penalty
> on number of onchain txs, which seems acceptable if the network is
> sufficiently mature that these failure events are rare.
> Note also that the (surprisingly common!) "user goes away" case where
> the casual user fails to rollover only returns funds to the dedicated
> user; relying on legal and normal custody policies in this case may be
> preferable to an eternal burden on the UTXO set with the current
> approach!
Agreed.
Thanks,
John
> Thankyou!
> Rusty.
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
|
