ZmnSCPxj [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2018-04-12 📝 Original message: Good morning Benjamin, > ...
📅 Original date posted:2018-04-12
📝 Original message:
Good morning Benjamin,
> Do (should) channels have the option of publicizing their balances, so as to improve routing performance / scalability in a large network, and for competitive differentiation among competing routes? This would allow channel owners to balance privacy with efficiency, and where the incentive to publish would go up in proportion to network scalability requirements. Brute force trial & error seems expensive at scale, and also reduces privacy of the sender - so it seems a useful hedge to leave this decision to the market (if technically practical).
I think brute-force scales well enough, but perhaps we should see the network in action more.
To an extent, it is possible to hint the suitability of a channel for routing in a particular direction, without completely leaking your balance in detail, by adjusting the on-Lightning `fee_base_msat` and `fee_proportional_millionths` of channels. If you have a high balance on a channel, you reduce your side of the fee for that channel (i.e. the direction where you are the source for payments on that channel) to encourage others to use it and hopefully pay you on a depleted channel. If you have a low balance, you increase your fee. These fees are already propagated using `channel_update`. No current node software implements this yet, however.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180412/f07760fc/attachment-0001.html>;
📝 Original message:
Good morning Benjamin,
> Do (should) channels have the option of publicizing their balances, so as to improve routing performance / scalability in a large network, and for competitive differentiation among competing routes? This would allow channel owners to balance privacy with efficiency, and where the incentive to publish would go up in proportion to network scalability requirements. Brute force trial & error seems expensive at scale, and also reduces privacy of the sender - so it seems a useful hedge to leave this decision to the market (if technically practical).
I think brute-force scales well enough, but perhaps we should see the network in action more.
To an extent, it is possible to hint the suitability of a channel for routing in a particular direction, without completely leaking your balance in detail, by adjusting the on-Lightning `fee_base_msat` and `fee_proportional_millionths` of channels. If you have a high balance on a channel, you reduce your side of the fee for that channel (i.e. the direction where you are the source for payments on that channel) to encourage others to use it and hopefully pay you on a depleted channel. If you have a low balance, you increase your fee. These fees are already propagated using `channel_update`. No current node software implements this yet, however.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180412/f07760fc/attachment-0001.html>;