Martin Habovštiak [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2021-07-12 📝 Original message: Hi guys, happy to see ...

📅 Original date posted:2021-07-12
📝 Original message:
Hi guys,

happy to see this being discussed again! When I came up with the idea,
it was originally intended for cases when there's an inherently trusted
exchange,
such as trading fiat for sats using an ATM. In this scenario only the push
amount was spendable.
Receiving more on top of that was disabled.

Since then some implementations have made zero-conf channels fully
operational.
While strictly worse security, I'm not against it. I'd just really, really
like to have these
cases distinguished.

So I think we need one more bit to signal whether it's only push being
zeroconf or the
channel is fully zeroconf.

Cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20210712/63b84d91/attachment.html>;