Christian Decker [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2018-12-04 📝 Original message: Which brings us back to ...

📅 Original date posted:2018-12-04
📝 Original message:
Which brings us back to the initial proposal that just signals the
awareness of a temporary underpayment with the single "more is coming"-bit.

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 11:49 PM Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> wrote:

> ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com> writes:
> > But what if 2 of those paths fail?
> > It would be better to merge them into a single payment along the
> expensive 4th path.
> > However, the remaining succeeding path has already given `numpaths`=3.
> >
> > Using `numpaths` overcommits to what you will do in the future, and is
> unnecessary anyway.
> > The payee is interested in the total value, not the details of the split.
>
> Excellent point.
>
> Thanks,
> 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/20181204/de818531/attachment-0001.html>;