[Lightning-dev] Opening channels with neighbors for cost/connectivity benefit

[Karan Verma]

Hello,
The sender node doesn’t always have a route to the receiving node accepting
lightning payments and since opening new channels is costly - I was wondering if
there was a smarter way to open channels such that it increases the
connectedness of the sender node with other nodes in the network and also
possibly save money in the intended transaction.
To clarify, if Bob wants to send money to Alice but doesn’t have a route to her.
He would need to open a new channel with Alice and send the money. This is
costly for Bob if that was the only transaction he ever wanted to do with Alice.
However, if Alice was connected to Charlie and Dave (Unidirectional: Charlie ->
Alice & Dave -> Alice due to the amount being sent). He could instead connect
with Charlie/Dave or nodes connected with them which have a route to Alice
through Charlie/Dave such that it minimizes the transaction cost to reaching
Alice (some routes might have negative fee) and maximizes the number of nodes
Bob can now reach through this channel. Lets say if Bob chose Charlie's
neighbor, then he can now reach at-least three nodes - Charlie's neighbor,
Charlie and Alice and end up paying less.
Essentially we're sorting choice of the nodes to open a channel with by
transaction fee and connectedness it brings to the origin node. This would
benefit Bob in the long term and also maybe lightning network as a whole. I'm
new to lightning and would appreciate feedback on this idea. Thanks.
-Karan___
Lightning-dev mailing list
Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev

Re: [Lightning-dev] Can I try Lightning without running a fully-fledged bitcoin block chain?

[Segue]

Developers,

On THIS note and slightly off-topic but relevant, why can't chunks of 
blockchain peel off the backend periodically and be archived, say on 
minimum of 150 computers across 7 continents?


It seems crazy to continue adding on to an increasingly long chain to 
infinity if the old chapters (i.e. more than, say, 2 years old) could be 
stored in an evenly distributed manner across the planet.  The same 150 
computers would not need to store every chapter either, just the index 
would need to be widely distributed in order to reconnect with a chapter 
if needed.


Then maybe it is no longer a limitation in the future for people like Yubin.

Segue


On 3/26/18 6:12 PM, lightning-dev-requ...@lists.linuxfoundation.org wrote:

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:56:05 +0100
From: Federico Tenga
To: Yubin Ruan
Cc:lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] Can I try Lightning without running a
fully-fledged bitcoin block chain?
Message-ID:

[Lightning-dev] Lightning network implementation with ethereum

[Mahesh Govind]

Dear Experts,

Could you please let me know the implementation I could use with ethereum  .

With thanks and regards
mahesh
___
Lightning-dev mailing list
Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev

Re: [Lightning-dev] Can I try Lightning without running a fully-fledged bitcoin block chain?

[Federico Tenga]

You can try pruning, you will still have to validate the whole chain so it
takes time, but you won't need to store all the blockchain on your disk.

On 17 March 2018 at 10:02, Yubin Ruan  wrote:

> I just don't have so much space for a storing the whole blockchain on my
> laptop.
>
> Yubin
>
> ___
> 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