Joost Jager [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2021-10-15 📝 Original message: > > > On Thu, Oct 14, ...

📅 Original date posted:2021-10-15
📝 Original message:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 09:48:27AM +0200, Joost Jager wrote:
> >
> > > So how would things work out with a combination of both of the
> > > proposals described in this mail? First we make probing free (free as
> > > in no liquidity locked up) and then we'll require senders to pay for
> > > failed payment attempts too. Failed payment attempts after a
> > > successful probe should be extremely rate, so doesn't this fix the ux
> > > issue with upfront fees?
> >
> > Why couldn't a malicious routing node (or group of colluding routing
> > nodes) succeed the probe and then fail the payment in order to collect
> > the failed payment fee?
>
> Good observation!
>
> I propose substantially the same thing here:
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2021-September/003256.html


I totally missed that thread, but it is indeed the same thing including the
notion that it may make upfront payments palatable! Contains some great
additional ideas too.

Joost
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20211015/342fb320/attachment.html>;