God afternoon ZmnSCPxj, Sorry if I was being a bit pedantic,
I just want to be clear that I agree with both yours and Andrea's arguments in the initial responses and I see now why the idea doesn't make much sense at all in terms of scale and privacy. > > My initial point was that the fee would be proportionally higher for every satoshi used closer to the far end of the channel. > > So the fee would proportional to the state of the channel in addition to the size of the payment. > > But the final state of the channel has a subtractive relationship from the > payment size. > So I fear we have largely fallen into an argument on exact semantics and > mathematical models that may not be particularly relevant to pragmatic use > of LN. > I'm not trying to argue here as I agree with you it's not practical, I just wanted to clarify as we seemed to be talking passed each other on that particular point. Best regards John-John Markstedt
_______________________________________________ Lightning-dev mailing list Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
