Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-06 Thread Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev
I didn't trust myself and verify. In fact the [3] is the real [2]. Le mar. 5 mai 2020 à 06:28, Andrés G. Aragoneses a écrit : > Hey Antoine, just a small note, [3] is missing in your footnotes, can you > add it? Thanks > > On Tue, 5 May 2020 at 18:17, Antoine Riard > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-06 Thread Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev
> The choice between whether we offer them a light client technology that is better or worse for privacy and scalability. And offer them a solution which would scale in the long-term. Again it's not an argumentation against BIP 157 protocol in itself, the problem I'm interested in is how

Re: [bitcoin-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-06 Thread Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev
I do see the consensus capture argument by miners but in reality isn't this attack scenario have a lot of assumptions on topology an deployment ? For such attack to succeed you need miners nodes to be connected to clients to feed directly the invalid headers and if these ones are connected to

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-06 Thread Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev
> As a result, the entire protocol could be served over something like HTTP, taking advantage of all the established CDNs and anycast serving infrastructure, Yes it's moving the issue of being a computation one to a distribution one. But still you need the bandwidth capacities. What I'm concerned

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] On the scalability issues of onboarding millions of LN mobile clients

2020-05-06 Thread Keagan McClelland via bitcoin-dev
Hi Antoine, Consensus capture by miners isn't the only concern here. Consensus capture by any subset of users whose interests diverge from the overall consensus is equally damaging. The scenario I can imagine here is that the more light clients outpace full nodes, the more the costs of security