pull down to refresh
0 new comment
208 sats \ 1 reply \ @nerd2ninja 27 Nov 2023
Oh. This is a channel factory
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @megaptera 27 Nov 2023
hmmm, I don't know. Its more of a fat channel pool.
reply
0 new comment
20 sats \ 3 replies \ @megaptera 27 Nov 2023
interesting. That could be indeed a game changer.
Here is the original lightning-dev mailinglist post: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2023-August/004057.html
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @nerd2ninja 27 Nov 2023
"In the attachment" where's the attachment???
reply
0 new comment
785 sats \ 0 replies \ @megaptera 27 Nov 2023
here: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230820/bfb41b20/attachment-0001.pdf
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ClickForCharity OP 27 Nov 2023
The first link didn't work it looks like it was "scrubbed" but the second one leads to a pdf https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230820/bfb41b20/attachment-0001.pdf
reply
0 new comment
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @trevor 27 Nov 2023
Ooooh very nice! Bitcoin development continues to blow me away!
reply
0 new comment
5 sats \ 0 replies \ @Wumbo 28 Nov 2023
Sound promising. My first thought was what happens if one of the peer is offline. The below quote from the PDF seems to address this. There are always trade off but sounds like a force close of the channel could get more expensive then a regular Lightning Channel
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Zepasta 28 Nov 2023
Really interesting!
reply
0 new comment