Matt Corallo <lf-li...@mattcorallo.com> writes: > On 4/27/21 17:32, Rusty Russell wrote: >> OK, draft is up: >> >> https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc/pull/867 >> >> I have to actually implement it now (though the real win comes from >> making it compulsory, but that's a fair way away). >> >> Notably, I added the requirement that update_fee messages be on their >> own. This means there's no debate on the state of the channel when >> this is being applied. > > I do have to admit *that* part I like :). > > If we don't do turns for splicing, I wonder if we can take the rules around > splicing pausing other HTLC updates, make > them generic for future use, and then also use them for update_fee in a > simpler-to-make-compulsory change :).
Yes, it is similar to the close requirement, except that requires all HTLCs be absent. Cheers, Rusty. _______________________________________________ Lightning-dev mailing list Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
