On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:31:54AM -0400, Matt Corallo wrote: > On 6/28/22 9:05 AM, Christian Decker wrote: > > It is worth mentioning here that the LN protocol is generally not very > > latency sensitive, and from my experience can easily handle very slow > > signers (3-5 seconds delay) without causing too many issues, aside from > > slower forwards in case we are talking about a routing node. I'd expect > > routing node signers to be well below the 1 second mark, even when > > implementing more complex signer logic, including MuSig2 or nested > > FROST. > > In general, and especially for "edge nodes", yes, but if forwarding nodes > start taking a full second to forward a payment, we probably need to start > aggressively avoiding any such nodes - while I'd love for all forwarding > nodes to take 30 seconds to forward to improve privacy, users ideally expect > payments to complete in 100ms, with multiple payment retries in between.
Idle question: would it be worthwhile to allow people to opt-in to their payments happening more slowly for privacy? At the very least it'd be fine if payments done by automation for rebalancing, etc. happened slowly. -- https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Lightning-dev mailing list Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
