pull down to refresh

20 sats \ 5 replies \ @SimpleStacker 23 Oct \ parent \ on: Route Not Found lightning
How does this interact with the concept of an "attached wallet"?
User A and User B both have direct private channels to SN with plenty of liquidity both ways. They have no other channels. They both have attached wallets.
Are they able to zap each other directly through SN?
write
preview
244 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 23 Oct
Yes, because SN proxies the invoice. The sender pushes money to SN (SN can't yet settle it without a "cryptographic proof" it only gets when the receiver is paid), SN pays the receiver, then SN settles with the sender.
Both the sender and receiver only need to know about SN and be able to route to/from. Neither lightning node knows who the other node is.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 23 Oct
Are you worried this makes SN a money transmittal organization? 😵‍💫
reply
251 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 23 Oct
we're moving towards this to not be a money transmitter
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 23 Oct
This is what every lightning routing node does.
SN never has custody which, to date at least, has been what determines whether an entity is a money transmitter.
reply
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 23 Oct
I see.... there is still much I need to learn about the details of how lightning works.
reply