pull down to refresh

"The key challenge in scaling Lightning in a trust-free manner is the creation of Lightning channels for casual users. Signature-based factories (AKA other ideas for channel factories before this paper) appear to be inherently limited to creating at most tens or hundreds of Lightning channels per unspent transaction output (UTXO). In contrast, simple covenants (including those enabled by CheckTemplateVerify (CTV) or AnyPrevOut (APO)) would allow a single UTXO to create Lightning channels for millions of casual users.
The resulting covenant-based protocols also:
support resizing channels off-chain,
use the same capital to simultaneously provide in-bound liquidity to casual users and route unrelated payments for other users
charge casual users tunable penalties for attempting to put an old state on-chain, and
allow casual users to monitor the blockchain for just a few minutes every few months without employing a watchtower service.
As a result, adding CTV and/or APO to Bitcoin's consensus rules would go a long way toward making Lightning a widely-used means of payment
...
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 demonstrates that the key challenge in scaling Lightning is providing Lightning channels to casual users while meeting their usability requirements.
Section 3 then shows why no protocol that uses Bitcoin's current consensus rules is likely to meet this challenge.
Covenant-based protocols for creating Lightning channels are presented in Section 4,
and they are analyzed in Section 5. The remaining sections look at related work and give conclusions."
This has been my reformatted for readability but otherwise mostly copy and paste of the introduction of " Scaling Lightning With Simple Covenants" paper written by John Law. I hope this introduction gets you as interested in reading the paper as it has gotten me.
Huh! So eltoo-style penalty-free channels were possible all this time without CTV/APO? Nice!
reply
And the answer is yes....technically. Except that the math is too complex for anyone to actually implement it at least right now.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @om 14 Sep 2023
Can it be simplified by getting rid of the path where the channel is closed while processing a long-duration HTLC? I'm still not convinced that those are a good idea anyway.
reply
The real answer is I don't know. I just know like 2 people who understand the paper I linked (one of them being the author and I don't mean that I've met or talked to them just that they are a person that I am aware has understanding of the paper) and every other developer I've seen kinda struggles to fully comprehend what's going on with it.
Now, this is what specs are for, so maybe we'll get a spec of John Law's favorite paper one day.
reply
Interesting
reply
I don't trust this John Law fellow. Back in the 1600's, early 1700's he made a mess of the French economy. :)
reply
yeah... covenants especially in this manner would be used maliciously by anyone wanting to exclude honest actors.
reply
This is completely false. Covenants work just like regular tx's. You have to opt-in. Happy to answer any questions you have about CTV since it seems you're currently very confused.
reply
reply