From laolu32 at gmail.com Tue Aug 16 04:54:28 2016 From: laolu32 at gmail.com (Olaoluwa Osuntokun) Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 04:54:28 +0000 Subject: [Lightning-dev] [BOLT Draft] Onion Routing Spec In-Reply-To: <87wpjl3rzh.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <87oa5byeyf.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <87oa58ox54.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <87wpjl3rzh.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Message-ID: Rusty Russell wrote: > Some node will have to straddle two chains, right? So you'd route A -> > B -> C as normal, and C is (say) litecoin (B straddles both). You > really want the onion to be explicit that this transfer to litecoin is > what the sender intended. Or some sidechain. > > Now, we'd hope nobody would screw this up, but I think it's worth > flagging since the sender really should know it's changing chains. > > Ahh, I'm starting to see your point now. Agreed that it doesn't hurt to allocate an extra byte in order to make the chain transitions *explicit*. Alternatively, (instead of modifying the header) we can simply allocate the first byte of the per-hop payload for this purpose. -- Laolu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: