Johan Torås Halseth [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2018-09-20 📝 Original message: Any reason not to include ...

📅 Original date posted:2018-09-20
📝 Original message:
Any reason not to include _all_ (up to a limit) incoming channels with
sufficient capacity?

Cheers,
Johan

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 4:12 AM Rusty Russell <rusty at blockstream.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm considering a change to c-lightning, where `invoice` would
> automatically append an 'r' field for a channel which has sufficient
> *incoming* capacity for the amount (using a weighted probability across
> our peers).
>
> This isn't quite what 'r' was for, but it would be a useful
> hint for payment routing and also potentially for establishing an
> initial channel. This is an issue for the Blockstream Store which
> deliberately doesn't advertize an address any more to avoid
> centralization.
>
> Thoughts welcome!
> Rusty.
> _______________________________________________
> Lightning-dev mailing list
> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180920/83c90ab3/attachment.html>;