1208 sats \ 7 replies \ @rahim1971 7 May \ on: Please help me understand uneconomical forwards lightning
CLN does not always take the most economical route (default lightning-pay), doesn't it?
See: https://docs.corelightning.org/reference/lightning-pay#randomization
Route randomization means the payment algorithm does not always use the lowest-fee or shortest route. This prevents some highly-connected node from learning all of the user payments by reducing their fees below the network average.
write
preview
31 sats \ 0 replies \ @MiddleWay 7 May
Weird idea. How can a routing node learn user's payments when it cannot know where the payment originated and its final destination? Glad I am using LND.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @C_Otto OP 7 May
Interesting. Is paying 6x the price worth it, though?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 7 May
Lightning txs are usually so cheap that I think it's worth it
reply
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @random_ 7 May
CLN also factors in risk based on the amount of liquidity locked up vs. lock time.
Wonder what the capacities and lock times are along both routes OP mentioned. And min/max htlcs.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @C_Otto OP 7 May
  • c-otto.de to ACINQ: 100M capacity, time lock delta 99
  • c-otto.de to lnd v0.18.0-beta.rc1: 2.5M capacity, time lock delta 99
  • lnd v0.18.0-beta.rc1 to ACINQ: 4M capacity, time lock delta 100
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @random_ 7 May
curiouser and curiouser
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @random_ 7 May
different graph from the payee's POV? unsupported required features?
reply