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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBB9AC002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 16:45:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D1CD82B81
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 16:45:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 1mzgHxKFqJKc
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 16:45:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-4319.protonmail.ch (mail-4319.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.19])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4B7182B49
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 16:45:26 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 16:45:19 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail2; t=1652201124;
bh=veubUEcOmEYkCNNmdbp9+BGjf6bEokWEFeRSkTFqX9Y=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:
References:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:
Feedback-ID:Message-ID;
b=L2roGEEOhO1rFCHrCDC8x5KQAeEtez96ws+VDmhUYc3HpJmpvVqB5yaf0Z/Orml66
IOT9nuQoh/Mx7FX5pVjIX54Dn65WE1MRMqS/Xmgmm7G65SQTYEoQFoi3Eqd2/Cf3Gk
P2FKnoBq53bDJPx9Etl/tlAP+bMRWjdiPUMEXc81l9EWqKuQh4Sk81a2HntvtFH+fH
J8xK6qNGucZxWaRuGMKGvPpMXWlcwyHWYotcmIzQ1Gk4ZlWfv5HXFY4EdDrNfw9C1A
6uapLAsSYpuRWh4+eUyqHeXOX7QcQtFlIpyLNz1vJ8lBDqRTEBmhxfLrOdobzJ5v85
CvrffRAtRCdpw==
To: Billy Tetrud <billy.tetrud@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <mcikQmSFmiZw6Tq1GocybVcjGHNc-u9cP1aoZpJU-HEfgcqXXi1WhZSnEDMtEz3GfqAJGWpfZXjEBmsCXNSyLAgVNNcsSklERd-DJ8KeocE=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGpPWDa2wofye=KSq-vVNS0SOU34st9wm-hMhiYzGLTKMGuP5w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALZpt+GNoRdbtfeBtpnitiAZ4jGwSsRpSRXOyX7mzrhwewmBcw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGpPWDa2wofye=KSq-vVNS0SOU34st9wm-hMhiYzGLTKMGuP5w@mail.gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Conjectures on solving the high interactivity
issue in payment pools and channel factories
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: Tue, 10 May 2022 16:45:27 -0000
Good morning Billy,
> Very interesting exploration. I think you're right that there are issues =
with the kind of partitioning you're talking about. Lightning works because=
all participants sign all=C2=A0offchain states (barring data loss). If a p=
articipant can be excluded from needing to agree to a new state, there must=
be an additional mechanism to ensure the relevant state for that participa=
nt isn't changed to their detriment.=C2=A0
>
> To summarize my below email, the two techniques I can think for solving t=
his problem are:
>
> A. Create sub-pools when the whole group is live that can be used by the =
sub- pool=C2=A0participants later without the whole group's involvement. Th=
e whole group is needed to change the whole group's state (eg close or open=
sub-pools), but sub-pool=C2=A0states don't need to involve the whole group=
.
Is this not just basically channel factories?
To reduce the disruption if any one pool participant is down, have each sub=
-pool have only 2 participants each.
More participants means that the probability that one of them is offline is=
higher, so you use the minimum number of participants in the sub-pool: 2.
This makes any arbitrary sub-pool more likely to be usable.
But a 2-participant pool is a channel.
So a large multiparticipant pool with sub-pools is just a channel factory f=
or a bunch of channels.
I like this idea because it has good tradeoffs, so channel factories ho.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
