Rusty Russell [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-07-29 📝 Original message: Christopher Jamthagen ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-07-29
📝 Original message:
Christopher Jamthagen <cjamthagen at gmx.com> writes:
> Still trying to get the details right of this protocol. Please correct
> me if I am wrong in any of my assumptions below.
> Assume a payment route: Alice<>Bob<>Carol
> Alice want to pay Carol some amount. Carol gives Alice H(R) and Alice
> updates her commitment tx with Bob including the HTLC output and Bob
> does the same with Carol.
OK.
> Carol witholds R, forcing Bob to broadcast the commitment tx between
> Bob and Carol.
Yep, Carol goes non-responsive. Got it.
> Carol can now spend the HTLC output because she knows R and thus
> revealing it to the world. Alice now also refuses to update the
> commitment tx with Bob, forcing Bob to broadcast that commitment tx.
Poor Bob. Yep.
> This commitment tx is putting a delay on
> Bobs ability to spend the HTLC output (as well as all other outputs to
> him), but Alice can spend the HTLC output if the CLTV has expired.
Indeed, don't ever offer an HTLC less than your delay!
> In most examples I have seen, the CLTV is 2 days between Alice and Bob
> and 1 day between Bob and Carol, and all CSV delays are 3 days.
I haven't seen an example which included a CSV delay amount.
As the discussion with Joseph is establishing, the minimum CSV you allow
controls the worst-case HTLC you can accept. CSV of a few hours should
be OK if you're online all the time. I think...
Anyone want to do some stats on that? CSV uses the median time of last
11 blocks, so to some extent you can tell the worst case...
Cheers,
Rusty.
📝 Original message:
Christopher Jamthagen <cjamthagen at gmx.com> writes:
> Still trying to get the details right of this protocol. Please correct
> me if I am wrong in any of my assumptions below.
> Assume a payment route: Alice<>Bob<>Carol
> Alice want to pay Carol some amount. Carol gives Alice H(R) and Alice
> updates her commitment tx with Bob including the HTLC output and Bob
> does the same with Carol.
OK.
> Carol witholds R, forcing Bob to broadcast the commitment tx between
> Bob and Carol.
Yep, Carol goes non-responsive. Got it.
> Carol can now spend the HTLC output because she knows R and thus
> revealing it to the world. Alice now also refuses to update the
> commitment tx with Bob, forcing Bob to broadcast that commitment tx.
Poor Bob. Yep.
> This commitment tx is putting a delay on
> Bobs ability to spend the HTLC output (as well as all other outputs to
> him), but Alice can spend the HTLC output if the CLTV has expired.
Indeed, don't ever offer an HTLC less than your delay!
> In most examples I have seen, the CLTV is 2 days between Alice and Bob
> and 1 day between Bob and Carol, and all CSV delays are 3 days.
I haven't seen an example which included a CSV delay amount.
As the discussion with Joseph is establishing, the minimum CSV you allow
controls the worst-case HTLC you can accept. CSV of a few hours should
be OK if you're online all the time. I think...
Anyone want to do some stats on that? CSV uses the median time of last
11 blocks, so to some extent you can tell the worst case...
Cheers,
Rusty.