From pm+lists at acinq.fr  Tue Oct 13 11:45:39 2015
From: pm+lists at acinq.fr (Pierre)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:45:39 +0200
Subject: [Lightning-dev] Minor protocol revisions.
In-Reply-To: <20150929064740.GA9432@navy>
References: <87r3lo2wsi.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
	<CAMXsxZNq_guYvgdBGSGqwk5b5DWYJj-EY0uqm53DJKGKoHm=Xw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150929064740.GA9432@navy>
Message-ID: <CAMXsxZO34=-7Qo9GohhEGu=pFPDEXmc-kGLrqB-gK-60pLZkLw@mail.gmail.com>

>> Argh, I already have trouble understanding the rationale behind all
>> the existing closing flows and states :-s Would it be possible to
>> publish an updated version of the svg ? aj, any chance you could do
>> the same with your 'flat' version ?
>
> Yeah. I've updated state.py so the following flow works:

Thanks!

I guess what I'm missing about all those closing states is the reason
why we need to handle combinations of the 3 basic cases (current
commit, revoked commit or mutual close).

This cannot happen since they all spend the same anchor right ? Why do
we care if they are broadcasted and not confirmed ?

Cheers,

Pierre