> > > Isn't spam something that can also be addressed by using rate limits for > > failures? If all relevant nodes on the network employ rate limits, they > can > > isolate the spammer and diminish their disruptive abilities. > > Sure, once the spammer has jammed up the network, he'll be stopped. So > will everyone else. Conner had a proposal like this which didn't work, > IIRC. >
Do you have ref to this proposal? Imagine the following setup: a network of nodes that trust each other (as far as spam is concerned) applies a 100 htlc/sec rate limit to the channels between themselves. Channels to untrusted nodes get a rate of only 1 htlc/sec. Assuming the spammer isn't a trusted node, they can only spam at 1 htlc/s and won't jam up the network?
_______________________________________________ Lightning-dev mailing list Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
