pull down to refresh

Let's see what stackers think about this proposal
347 sats \ 4 comments \ @DarthCoin 5h lightning
If you run a PUBLIC routing node you must do heavy lifting to manage properly your liquidity. And here is an interesting proposal. Let's see what knowledgeable stackers think about it.
I use the auto-fee tool in Lightning Terminal for fee management. It works well to direct flows toward specific peers, but it doesnt not currently help in receiving flows from peers. Could negative inbound fees be incorporated into the tuning algorithm? This helps entice flows toward my node, which I otherwise can only control by lowering fees on a swath of other channels.
https://github.com/lightninglabs/lightning-terminal/issues/1157
write
preview
related posts
50 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 2h
Bosworth has talked about this, I actually thought they already had it in some form...
There's complicating factors in that if you have negative fees you're opening up potential exploits where you could get drained, and it would take a lot of automation to manage it.
reply
50 sats \ 1 reply \ @stinger32lnd 2h
This is the main reason I use LNDg. The one feature in Lightning Terminal I liked but did not do the math on was the handling of Loop In/Out. I feel these both play an important role in managing a node.
I've read articles and opinions on channel management. I think it was @DarthCoin who also said to incorporate MaxHTLC to aid in channel management. Any new thoughts or change in philosophy @DarthCoin?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin OP 46m
Any new thoughts or change in philosophy
No, I still use that policy.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 4h
It makes sense to me, especially if you would otherwise be paying to rebalance your channels occasionally.
reply