From nicolas.dorier at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 16:14:59 2016 From: nicolas.dorier at gmail.com (Nicolas Dorier) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 01:14:59 +0900 Subject: [Lightning-dev] Backward deterministic R Value In-Reply-To: <56DEF560.8080908@blockchain.com> References: <87d1r5ooev.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <1457421588.1640.3.camel@ultimatestunts.nl> <56DEECD9.9060202@blockchain.com> <56DEF560.8080908@blockchain.com> Message-ID: I don't understand your point, but that may come from me not having deep enough knowledge about the latest great things happening on Lightning. I exposed the case of a simple bipayment channel, without HTLC in the equation, where all payments are sequential. You can't make commitment n+2 before accepting commitment n+1. My mental model might be incomplete as I'm followed only remotely the improvements of lightning until now. On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Mats Jerratsch wrote: > I'm not saying they close the channel. Alice could want to receive more > money and accept other payments, but not a particular one. But by doing > so, she would automatically disclose R for any old payment. > > Am 08/03/2016 um 15:51 schrieb Nicolas Dorier: > > I'm not sure what you mean Alice don't have to disclose R if she does > > not want to. > > -- > Mats Jerratsch > Backend Engineer, Blockchain > e: mats at blockchain.com > PGP: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7F3EC6CA > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: