From ogunden at phauna.org Thu Sep 1 21:57:03 2022 From: ogunden at phauna.org (Owen Gunden) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 17:57:03 -0400 Subject: [Lightning-dev] Inbound channel routing fees In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 7/1/22 08:02, Joost Jager wrote:> Any thoughts from routing node operators would be welcome too (or links > to previous threads). I'm a routing node operator and have been for over a year. I've been wanting this feature (plus negative fees) for a long time now. Reason 1: For peers that tend to be liquidity sources (i.e. the liquidity tends to be all on my side), there's currently no way to keep a channel in balance with fees. All I can do is set a zero outbound fee and usually that's not good enough :/. A high inbound fee would discourage payments through that route. Reason 2: Not all inbound traffic is created equally. If two different peers wish to route through me to the same outbound peer, I may value the two forwards differently depending on who the sender is. E.g. A->C where A is a great peer that I frequently route payments to B->C where B is a peer that I rarely route payments to, or otherwise wish to preserve more inbound from I'm much happier routing A->C than I am routing B->C, but there's currently no way of expressing this to the market through fees. All I can do is htlc-intercept B->C and reject it, but this damages my reputation obviously. Reason 3: Greater expressivity in fee-setting generally allows markets to push more flows off-chain without having to loop or open new channels. While I think negative fees would be more impactful for this, inbound fees are helpful as well. Combining negative + inbound fees is where the real magic would happen IMO.