Technically you can do it with c-lightning today, if you create a circular route manually and then use the `sendpay` JSON-RPC command to send funds along that route it'll do just that. It's as simple as that.
We don't have built-in support yet, I don't know if we ever will, since it is trivially implemented outside of the daemon itself. I also don't think we need to consider this use-case at all from a protocol point of view. Cheers, Christian ZmnSCPxj via Lightning-dev <lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> writes: > Good Morning Robert, > > Yes, this already is possible, but is not implemented by any implementation > to my knowledge at this point. > > Note that "balance" is not necessarily a property you might desire for your > channels. In your example, under the "unbalanced" case, Bob can pay a 1.5BTC > invoice, but in the "balanced" case Bob can no longer pay that 1.5BTC > invoice. Of course, once AMP is possible then this consideration is not an > issue. > > Regards, > ZmnSCPxj > > Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email. > > -------- Original Message -------- > On February 7, 2018 12:53 AM, Robert Olsson <rob...@robtex.com> wrote: > >> Hello >> >> Let's say Bob opens a channel to Alice for 2BTC >> Carol then opens a channel to Bob for 2BTC. >> Alice and Carol are already connected to Others (and/or eachother even) >> The network and channel balances will look like this: >> >> Alice 0--2 Bob 0--2 Carol >> | | >> +----- OTHERS ------+ >> >> Bob for some reason wants the channels to be balanced, so he has some better >> redundancy and it looks better. >> >> So hypothetically Bob solves this by paying himself an invoice of 1BTC and >> making sure the route goes out thru Alice and comes back via Carol. Bob pays >> fees so he isn't ashamed if it disturbs the other balances in the network. >> Should he care? >> >> Alice 1--1 Bob 1--1 Carol >> | | >> +----- OTHERS ------+ >> >> Now Bob has two nice balanced channels, meaning he has better connectivity >> in both directions. >> >> Doesn't the protocol already support that kind of solutions, and all we need >> is a function in the CLI allowing Bob to pay to himself, and specify which >> two channels he would like to balance? >> >> Maybe even make it automatically balance. >> >> Is this a good idea of something to support, and/or Is there a risk the >> entire network will start doing this and it will start oscillating? >> >> Best regards >> Robert Olsson > _______________________________________________ > Lightning-dev mailing list > Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev _______________________________________________ Lightning-dev mailing list Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
