pull down to refresh
That would be interesting, or even allowing the choice of who covers the payment—whether it's split or absorbed by the node that isn't closing. In a scenario where a node connects other small local merchants with outside nodes, you could let that large node absorb the channel closing costs as a benefit. Are there any proposals today for something like what you suggested?
Payment channel closing fees should always be paid by the channel closer.
I think the game theory would play out much differently if you had to think long and hard before closing out a channel and paid the fee.
As it stands right now, I can open a channel with anyone and they can just close it and I have to pay the fee.