0 sats \ 0 replies \ @C_Otto OP 13 May \ parent \ on: My inbound fee policy for c-otto.de lightning
No implementation supports it.
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @C_Otto OP 12 May \ parent \ on: My inbound fee policy for c-otto.de lightning
It's part of the new proto file released with lnd v0.18, with additional parameters for
updatechanpolicy
in lncli
and the APIs. I don't see the reason, but you could check the existence of these parameters if you don't know the version of lnd itself.10 sats \ 2 replies \ @C_Otto OP 12 May \ parent \ on: My inbound fee policy for c-otto.de lightning
Current fee settings don't allow inbound fees.
No. I already have/run a known and reliable routing node. I don't need to advertise its existence, but I want to incentivize more routing to happen. Negative inbound fees don't mean that I don't earn fees.
This only affects my node, not the whole lightning network. As such, I think you're dealing with philosophical questions, whereas I try find concrete answers to problems I face myself.
Yeah, I saw that. I don't run a business myself, but maybe it makes sense to make certain BTC related channels (like this one) free to attract more users?
- c-otto.de to ACINQ: 100M capacity, time lock delta 99
- c-otto.de to lnd v0.18.0-beta.rc1: 2.5M capacity, time lock delta 99
- lnd v0.18.0-beta.rc1 to ACINQ: 4M capacity, time lock delta 100
c-otto.de is both (tor, ipv4, ipv6), the other node is tor only. I'm not sending any payment, I'm forwarding payments.