Joost Jager [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2022-07-04 📝 Original message: On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2022-07-04
📝 Original message:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 2:17 PM Thomas HUET <thomas.huet at acinq.fr> wrote:
> It was discussed in this issue:
> https://github.com/lightning/bolts/issues/835
>
Ah yes that was it. Thanks for the pointer!
> On the network, the traffic is not balanced. Some nodes tend to receive
> more than they send, merchants for instance. For the lightning network to
> be reliable, we need to incentivise people to open channels to such nodes,
> or else there won't be enough liquidity available and payments will fail.
> The current fee structure provides this incentive: You pay some onchain
> fees and lock some funds and in exchange you will earn routing fees. My
> concern is that your proposed change would break that incentive and make
> the network less reliable.
>
I'd think that if a merchant charges inbound fees, others won't open
channels and the merchant won't have inbound liquidity. So why would they
do this? Also if they wanted to charge inbound fees, they could already do
so today by setting up a fee-charging gateway with a private channel to the
main node that accepts the payments.
Joost
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20220704/d673ed26/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 2:17 PM Thomas HUET <thomas.huet at acinq.fr> wrote:
> It was discussed in this issue:
> https://github.com/lightning/bolts/issues/835
>
Ah yes that was it. Thanks for the pointer!
> On the network, the traffic is not balanced. Some nodes tend to receive
> more than they send, merchants for instance. For the lightning network to
> be reliable, we need to incentivise people to open channels to such nodes,
> or else there won't be enough liquidity available and payments will fail.
> The current fee structure provides this incentive: You pay some onchain
> fees and lock some funds and in exchange you will earn routing fees. My
> concern is that your proposed change would break that incentive and make
> the network less reliable.
>
I'd think that if a merchant charges inbound fees, others won't open
channels and the merchant won't have inbound liquidity. So why would they
do this? Also if they wanted to charge inbound fees, they could already do
so today by setting up a fee-charging gateway with a private channel to the
main node that accepts the payments.
Joost
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20220704/d673ed26/attachment.html>;