Good morning Robin,
> Good morning everybody!
>
> Thanks again for your detailed feedback.
>
> Maybe you're right and my solution is just crap :) So back to the drafting
> table!
>
> It seems to be a good idea to separate problem definition and solution. Here
> I tried to nail down LN's
As well I would like to point out that in order to receive funds, *something*
has to be online to get the message that receives the data.
In the blockchain layer this is diffused among all fullnodes.
At the Lightning layer, your direct peer could hold off on failing an incoming
payment while
Good thing no one is proposing a naive BIP 9 approach :). I'll note that
BIP 9 has been fairly robust (spy-mining issues notwithstanding, which
we believe are at least largely solved in the wild) in terms of safety,
though I noted extensively in the first mail that it failed in terms of
In general, your thoughts on the theory of how consensus changes should
work I strongly agree with. However, my one significant disagreement is
how practical it is for things to *actually* work that way. While I wish
ecosystem players (both businesses and users) spent their time
interacting with
Good morning everybody!
Thanks again for your detailed feedback.
Maybe you're right and my solution is just crap :) So back to the drafting
table!
It seems to be a good idea to separate problem definition and solution. Here I
tried to nail down LN's usability issue:
