> That's not 100% reliable at all. How long to you want for the new
gossip?
So you know it's a new channel, with a new capacity (look at the on-chain
output), between the same parties (assuming ppl use that multi-sig signal).
If
you attempt to route over it and have a stale policy, you'll get th
Hi Lisa,
> Adding a noticeable on-chain signal runs counter to the goal of the move
> to taproot / gossip v2, which is to make lightning's onchain footprint
> indistinguishable from any other onchain usage
My model of gossip v2 is something like:
* there's no longer a 1:1 mapping of channels a
Had another thought: if you've seen a chain close but also have a gossip
message that
indicates this is a splice, you SHOULD propagate that gossip more
urgently/widely than
any other gossip you've got. Adding an urgency metric to gossip is fuzzy to
enforce... *handwaves*.
You *do* get the onchain
Adding a noticeable on-chain signal runs counter to the goal of the move
to taproot / gossip v2, which is to make lightning's onchain footprint
indistinguishable from
any other onchain usage.
I'm admittedly a bit confused as to why onchain signals are even being
seriously
proposed. Aside from "in
Olaoluwa Osuntokun writes:
> Hi Rusty,
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
>> This is over-design: if you fail to get reliable gossip, your routing will
>> suffer anyway. Nothing new here.
>
> Idk, it's pretty simple: you're already watching for closes, so if a close
> looks a certain way, it's a spli
Hi Rusty,
Thanks for the feedback!
> This is over-design: if you fail to get reliable gossip, your routing will
> suffer anyway. Nothing new here.
Idk, it's pretty simple: you're already watching for closes, so if a close
looks a certain way, it's a splice. When you see that, you can even take
Hi Roasbeef,
This is over-design: if you fail to get reliable gossip, your routing
will suffer anyway. Nothing new here.
And if you *know* you're missing gossip, you can simply delay onchain
closures for longer: since nodes should respect the old channel ids for
a while anyway.
Matt's proposal
Hi y'all,
This mail was inspired by this [1] spec PR from Lisa. At a high level, it
proposes the nodes add a delay between the time they see a channel closed on
chain, to when they remove it from their local channel graph. The motive
here is to give the gossip message that indicates a splice is in
