Lightning channels created by Phoenix now use taproot, meaning that they are cheaper (by about 15%), and more private, since they cannot be distinguished from regular transactions. Beforehand, it was easy for third parties to detect if a Bitcoin transaction was related to a Lightning channel operation.
Existing channels are automatically transformed to taproot channels when they perform an on-chain operation. For example, if they receive a Lightning payment that needs to expand the channel (splice-in) ; or if they send funds on-chain (splice-out).
Newly created channels are always taproot channels.
Phoenix is also introducing multiwallet in this version.
Are these channels compatible with the old ones? Or does this basically start another Lightning Network?
I don't think so. All Phoenix channels are private channels with ACINQ afaik. So this is like LND's taproot channels which are private only.
But presumably ACINQ runs a node that has both these taproot channels and normal channels? So someone paying a phoenix user can have the payment flow over both normal channels (on the way to the Phoenix LSP and then over a taproot channel to the user.
So a taproot channel wouldn't be a separate network any more than any other channel on its own is?
Yes, private channels are a consensus of two. The spec for public channels (ie channels wanting to be included in the network graph) does not support taproot channels yet afaik.
A private taproot channel wouldn't be a separate network any more than any other private channel on its own is. A private channel is like a network of size two, so it is a separate network in a sense.
Public channels which are included in the network graph and can carry payments for other nodes (be routed across) are expected to have non-taproot channels currently.
this is super helpful! thanks.
I don't see why a node couldn't have both taproot and normal channels, but probably the lightning people should weigh in.
Yes you can have both types of channels as you can have public and private channels on the same node. Is just an option when you open a new channel and also the peer have to support it too.
I hope you are joking with this question...
Coming from a guy that "builds" a LN wallet and doesn't know how taproot channels work? Is a joke right?
Great news!
Yes! I'm very pleased with this.
Is it possible for ACINQ to view Phoenix Wallet receipts / payments and correlate them with an IP address, given that they are the LSP?
https://phoenix.acinq.co/faq#how-private-are-my-payments-on-phoenix
I've tried this wallet the other day. Their fees are ridiculous though
Not really. Their usual fees for payments are not higher than any other LSP or routing node.
I think you are confusing the 1st deposit (that is opening a channel) with regular routing fees. Are not the same.
I've explained in some of my guides the best practice to use this mobile node.
To avoid paying the splice-in fees (that means expanding the channel size and paying onchain fees), you better make a larger initial deposit and then withdraw max 90% (if you want more inbound liquidity), but never empty that channel, otherwise they will close it.
If you make small deposits, every time you will be charged 10k sats for each splice-in. But that doesn't mean "they have high fees", is just that you didn't read the documentation and don't know how to use it properly.
excellent, Phoenix continues to push the rock amidst the cacophony of noise
When taproot channels on LND?
LOL LND had taproot channels for ages... from v0.17
but only private channels
Exactly. You do not achieve any privacy if you are already a public node.
Public nodes are for PUBLIC routing, private nodes are for PRIVATE payments.
LOL use your brain.
Is like going naked in a public square and scream to everybody that you want privacy and they should not look at your balls...
Public is public and private is private. Or you do not understand the differences?
When people will learn the differences between LN private and public channels?
As long as I understand having public channels with taproot will make impossible to see if a tx was a normal oc tx or an tx to open a LN channel with is a privacy enhancement. If one has a public channel but whoever observers the timechain can't link the onchain tx to open such channel is a good thing.
It doesn't make sense. If you are a public node, anybody can see all your channels ID, channel point etc.
As I said: public nodes are for PUBLIC routing. If you want privacy run a private node.
Or use a public node as a decoy... but that imply to use too much your brains.
It makes all the sense if you have a public node but nobody can link those sats moving there with the sats onchain used to open or close the channels.
OMG you are lost in your own stupidity. You cannot make the difference between the words public and private?
How many times I have to explain it to you? You cannot have full privacy by default when you are in a public realm.
Why is so hard to run a damn private node?