Re: [Lightning-dev] Fulgurite: ideas for making a more flexible Lightning Network protocol

2018-12-11 Thread ZmnSCPxj via Lightning-dev
Good morning Trey, > > Would it really be masquerading though? The standard shouldn't care > about how a multiparty channel is implemented, only the effective > balance between each party in each subchannel. And that's regardless > of if it's with Fulgurite being nested in BDW as previously

Re: [Lightning-dev] [META] Organization of 1.1 Spec Effort

2018-12-11 Thread Rusty Russell
Matt Corallo writes: > Any update on this? It seems like the people who bothered to respond > were pretty in favor of not using calls (and, at least based on the > latest call doc, which is the only one I've seen, they seem to be only > somewhat sparsely attended). We always have a