Simply doesn't need touched that often unless you're sinking or draining, and that's more of a splicing/swap automation, not really channel balancing
Should never ever ever ever be doing circular rebalances, it's all cost no benefit. That's leftover anti pattern from the early days.
If a channel is exhausted you set a prohibitive fee on it and it sorts itself out. If it's lopsided the other way you set it to near 0.
A channel being exhausted one way or the other doesn't effect the ability to send or receive if you have others that aren't. Redundancy, not balance.
Pub shows me when a channel opens, closes, or is offline. When one closes I'll open another with the resulting chain balance if it was meaningful relative to liabilities. If one has been offline for a long time, maybe close it if encumbered funds are material, and reuse. Handful of ops annually, an hour work tops to know my topology.
Simply doesn't need touched that often unless you're sinking or draining, and that's more of a splicing/swap automation, not really channel balancing
Should never ever ever ever be doing circular rebalances, it's all cost no benefit. That's leftover anti pattern from the early days.
If a channel is exhausted you set a prohibitive fee on it and it sorts itself out. If it's lopsided the other way you set it to near 0.
A channel being exhausted one way or the other doesn't effect the ability to send or receive if you have others that aren't. Redundancy, not balance.
Pub shows me when a channel opens, closes, or is offline. When one closes I'll open another with the resulting chain balance if it was meaningful relative to liabilities. If one has been offline for a long time, maybe close it if encumbered funds are material, and reuse. Handful of ops annually, an hour work tops to know my topology.