Hello Ecurrencyhodler,

We've been considering this flow for muun wallet, which has native
submarine swap functionality, so it wouldn't be too difficult to implement.
However, there's some problems with the idea:

* As ZmnSCPxj notes, the push_msat functionality doesn't work for
non-custodial setups, like a submarine swap. It does work for Bitrefill's
Thor (ie. turbo channels) because you are trusting them to hold your money
until the channel fully confirms. Per the RFC, "push_msat is an amount of
initial funds that the sender is *unconditionally* giving to the receiver".

* You *can* use an HTLC payment once the channel is deep enough, but you'll
have to wait until the channel is locked to receive the money and be able
to spend it. While this might be good enough for some use cases, like
charging your own node, it doesn't provide the seamless UX for lightning
payments you're looking for.

Having said that, if the usability of the scheme "open channel, wait until
it's locked, then send HTLC payment" were deemed good enough, then routing
nodes could implement this idea to route payments "just in time", even if
there aren't any pre-existing routes to the destination.

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 8:42 PM ZmnSCPxj via Lightning-dev <
lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Good morning Ecurrencyhodler,
>
> It seems to me a trusted model then.
> Regardless of who makes the channel (the payee cannot determine who the
> payer is anyway) the payee cannot trustlessly release the product until the
> channel is deeply confirmed, else your security is only 0-conf, not
> off-chain.
>
> Further, `push_msat` has the drawback of not providing proof-of-payment,
> thus an intermediate hop node may be unable to claim funds.
> (I believe `push_msat` was a mistake: you should simply make a normal HTLC
> payment (that provides proof-of-payment) after the channel is deeply
> confirmed, and `push_msat`, if you read lightning-rfc, does have this
> warning that you cannot trust money you receive that way until the channel
> is deeply confirmed.)
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj
>
> Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Thursday, August 15, 2019 2:05 AM, ecurrencyhodler <
> ecurrencyhod...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >So would `push_msat`; until confirmed deeply the channel opening can
> still be cancelled by double-spending and it would be foolhardy to deliver
> the product until the channel is deeply confirmed to be opened.
> >
> > Okay so there's 2 situations here I'd like to explore:
> >
> > 1. Bob -> routing node -> Me
> >
> > 2. Bob -> Me
> >
> > Scenario 1
> > If Bob pays the invoice and the routing node opens a payment channel and
> pushes sats to me, you could stipulate that the routing node isn't able to
> fully take ownership of the sats until 6 confirmations potentially via Hodl
> Invoices (by the time the routing nodes channel with pushed payments
> confirms with mine).  But I could still make LN payments instantly through
> the routing node because the routing node just needs to wait until the 6
> confirmations and settle all accounts after the fact.
> >
> > Scenario 2
> > Bob and I know each other so if channel disappears, it's basically the
> same situation with Thor's instant channel.  But we could completely remove
> scenario 2 and only allow routing nodes to open channels to me as long as
> Bob makes the payment.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 12:03 AM ZmnSCPxj <zmnsc...@protonmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Good morning Ecurrencyhodler,
> > >
> > > > Hi ZmnSCPxj!
> > > >
> > > > Submarine swaps are a great current solution, but we still have to
> wait for confirmations.
> > >
> > > So would `push_msat`; until confirmed deeply the channel opening can
> still be cancelled by double-spending and it would be foolhardy to deliver
> the product until the channel is deeply confirmed to be opened.
> > > At least this way, you can perform the preparation in parallel to your
> other startup operations for starting your business before actual launch of
> your merchant website.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >Further, while it involves fees, it does give you control over what
> nodes you make channels with, and would be a good investment in your future
> accessibility over the Lightning Network.
> > > >
> > > > What disadvantages do you see over this proposal and say something
> like autopilot?  Or do you just prefer manual channel management overall?
> > >
> > > This should eventually be implementable by some kind of auto-system.
> > > It is still early days and a lot of infrastructure is yet to be
> written.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > ZmnSCPxj
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 6:27 PM ZmnSCPxj <zmnsc...@protonmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Good morning Ecurrencyhodler,
> > > > >
> > > > > A current and practical way to set up incoming liquidity would be
> to take some onchain funds, create a channel to a high-uptime node on the
> network (just run an autopilot), then use a submarine swap (i.e. pay
> offchain funds to buy onchain funds).
> > > > > Then you can reuse the same onchain funds over and over to make
> more liquidity until the submarine swap provider runs out of onchain funds
> or you have sufficient liquidity or your money has been drained by the fees
> involved.
> > > > >
> > > > > While this requires onchain funds, presumably as a new business or
> merchant you will have capital in some form before starting your business.
> > > > > The most sensible way to store and transport financial capital is,
> of course, Bitcoin, thus you already have what is needed to start this, you
> simply have to do it before you perform other operations.
> > > > > Further, while it involves fees, it does give you control over
> what nodes you make channels with, and would be a good investment in your
> future accessibility over the Lightning Network.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > ZmnSCPxj
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
> > > > >
> > > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> > > > > On Monday, August 12, 2019 11:42 AM, Ecurrencyhodler Blockchains <
> ecurrencyhod...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi. I'd like to propose a way for instant inbound liquidity to
> be automated via invoices and would appreciate your feedback.  It's similar
> to Thor's instant channel but this proposal would only be valuable if it
> becomes a standard across all lightning implementations and wallets.  It
> won't work if it's limited to just one Lightning wallet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Proposal: Automated Inbound Liquidity With Invoices
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For Who: Full Lightning Network nodes
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Problem: Waiting for inbound liquidity as channel establishes
> when you first come online and want to receive a LN payment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Solution: Embedding the node uri of the invoice creator, along
> with amount to be routed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Scenario:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1.  Bob wants to send me 100,000 sats.
> > > > > > 2.  My node just came online and has 0 inbound liquidity.
> > > > > > 3.  I create an invoice for 100,000 sats.  My LN node recognizes
> I have 0 inbound liquidity so my wallet also embeds my URI in the invoice.
> > > > > > 4.  Bob’s wallet sees an invoice + uri.  Maybe even tries to
> route.  When it doesn’t see anything, it auto opens a channel + pushes
> 100,000 sat payment.
> > > > > > 5.  I now own and can spend 100,000 sats instantly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Considerations:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -   This auto establishing of channels and pushing payments
> isn’t for all LN nodes.  Just routing nodes.
> > > > > > -   Bob doesn’t need to be the one to establish the channel.  He
> can push the information down the line until a node dedicated to routing is
> found.  The routing node can then be the one to establish the channel with
> me.
> > > > > > -   Certain specifics need to be flushed out such as the size of
> Bob’s channel.  Right now I think Bob can manually set the size of the
> channels to be established on his end.  Should be smaller channels at
> first.  If the person gets paid again, just establish another channel
> towards the same node if there isn't enough capacity.
> > > > > > -   Routing nodes who provide this service can charge a premium.
> > > > > > -   Bob, as a liquidity provider, won't cheat against himself so
> I can make LN payments instantly.
> > > > > > -   The beauty behind this proposal is that I can receive a
> payment instantly, I can send payments instantly, and that it hides
> everything from me as an end user.
> > > > > > -   Can possibly be extended to neutrino LN wallets if they are
> public.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to