From rusty at rustcorp.com.au Fri Apr 13 00:02:40 2018 From: rusty at rustcorp.com.au (Rusty Russell) Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 09:32:40 +0930 Subject: [Lightning-dev] Commitment delay asymmetry In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <87vacwvuqn.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Jim Posen writes: > I find it easier to analyze the game theory of these situations if the > to_remote output is also time-locked by the to_remote_delay. Making the > consequence of an on-chain settlement symmetric changes the game from > chicken [1] to a tragedy of the commons [2]. I'm curious how other people > think about this. It does increase incentive to mutual close, and it makes some kinds of sense: A tells B what the delay is, so having A subject to it too is fair. By extension, perhaps both sides should use the maximum delay either one asks for? I don't think it's urgent, but please put it into the brainstorming part of the wiki so we don't lose track?[1] Cheers, Rusty. [1] Which someone should organize into a new "proposals" page..