pull down to refresh

Is it possible NOT to find a route for a payment invoice to a node that’s running and with one channel open?
Same question but maybe better explained: My node X is connected to node Y (which is connected to many others). Is it possible not finding a route to get a payment from Z?
Should I then Open a Channel directly with Z? Would that make my node the connection between Y and Z? Will I route transactions between Y and Z if I left that two channels opened?
Path finding in a payment depends on many aspects:
  • enough liquidity in that direction. Liquidity on both sides.
  • enough small fees on the route.
  • correctly updated the LN graph (maybe the node Y still "can't see" that node Z is online, even that maybe the node Z is OK, but the graph on the node Y is not yet updated with the latest status of the node Z
  • node Z enough inbound liquidity and routes
  • wallet that is used for that payment - maybe is using too low fees level, maybe it can't use too many hops etc
  • the Y and Z nodes are behind Tor and they have a bad connection, that will go back to badly synced graph ... etc etc etc
So yes, in general a payment could not find a correct route. Try again later or increase the fees.
reply
Oh, must be Tor connection and low fees. Will try later with increased fees to see if that’s the problem and then open a channel anyway with Z for future transactions. Thx!
reply
Your explanations are so didactical and well done. If you could take just half the time with the poor, confused shitcoiners and show them the the force, instead insulting them with capital letters, we will have a better world.
reply
Generally speaking, it makes sense to open a channel to nodes you plan to do business with. Routing's bests use case is for transacting with nodes you didn't plan to do business with and especially if you don't plan to continue to do business with that node.
The model is a little different when you're using an LSP though.
reply