Except we have invoices with no specified amount (payer dictates how much to
pay).
Which is why we need to send the total amount to the payee as part of the onion
final hop, for the case the invoice has no specified amount.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 7:40 PM, Christian Decker
<decker.christ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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 <ru...@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
>
>> ZmnSCPxj <zmnsc...@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@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
