Good morning Ruben,

> Hi ZmnSCPxj,
>
> > the current owner can ask the statechain entity to sign an alternative to 
> > the first stage, with 0 relative locktime
>
> Unless I am misunderstanding something, this seems to run into the problem 
> that the original first stage transaction is already out there (and its 
> relative timelock started ticking). There is no mechanism ensuring that the 
> new tx will have precedence. And even if it did work, I doubt it's cleaner 
> than doing a cooperative peg-out that simultaneously happens to peg back in, 
> creating a brand new statechain UTXO with no history.


If:

* You are sure the old first stage tx has > 0 relative locktime.
* The replacement tx (which replaces the old first stage) has a 0 relative 
locktime.
  * The replacement tx redirects the funds to a new funding output for a 
(logically continuous, onchain new) statechain.

Then the replacement tx, having a smaller relative locktime than the old first 
stage, has precedence.
Indeed, having a *smaller* relative locktime is exactly the mechanism 
Decker-Wattenhofer uses.

So this is the state, with the kickoff having just been confirmed onchain:


    ***blockchain***
       [funding tx]->[kickoff tx]-+
         _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _|_ _ _
     offchain                     |
                                  +->[[ 7] stage]->[[ 0] stage]->[[14] stage]-> 
state outputs

Since the first stage is still "ticking" it is not yet confirmable onchain.

You ask the statechain to create an alternative, 0-relative-locktime, 
re-funding tx, and create a new mechanism:

    ***blockchain***
       [funding tx]->[kickoff tx]-+
         _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _|_ _ _
     offchain                     |
                                  +->[[ 7] stage]->[[ 0] stage]->[[14] stage]-> 
state outputs
                                 (OR)
                                  |
                                  +->[[ 0] funding tx]->[kickoff tx]->[[14] 
stage]->[[14] stage]->[[14] stage]->state outputs

Because it has a time advantage, this new re-funding tx has higher priority 
(and is the same mechanism Decker-Wattenhofer has anyway).

Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

Reply via email to