ZmnSCPxj writes: > Good morning Rusty, > > To clarify, it seems the below: > > 1. There is a "private" node, one whose channels are all non-published. > 2. There is a public node who knows that everything that passes through the > channel with the "private" node comes only from the "private"
On Sun, Nov 04, 2018 at 01:30:48PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > I'm not sure. Jonas Nick proposed a scheme, which very much assumes > Schnorr AFAICT: > Jonas Nick wrote: > > How I thought it would work is that the invoice would contain a > > Schnorr nonce R. (Note this means the "invoice" must
Anthony Towns writes: >> > - channel announcements: do you support secp256k1 for hashes or just >> >sha256? >> Worse, it becomes "I support secp256k1 with ECDSA" then a new "I support >> secp256k1 with Schnorr". You need a continuous path of channels with >> the same feature. > > I don't