Re: [Lightning-dev] Bi-directional or uni-directional?

2017-11-21 Thread Pierre
Hi, > Does this mean that each channel is funded by one party only but they can make payments in both directions (assuming that some initial payments are made by the party funding the channel)? Yes. Note that the field `push_msat` allows that initial payment to be made as part of the channel

Re: [Lightning-dev] Bi-directional or uni-directional?

2017-11-21 Thread Alan Carbery via Lightning-dev
[mailto:ru...@rustcorp.com.au] Sent: 21 November 2017 03:05 To: Alan Carbery <alanc...@googlemail.com>; lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] Bi-directional or uni-directional? Alan Carbery via Lightning-dev <lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>

Re: [Lightning-dev] Bi-directional or uni-directional?

2017-11-20 Thread Rusty Russell
Alan Carbery via Lightning-dev writes: > Hi, > > All the tutorials that I've read about Lightning describe bi-directional > channels. However, reading through the draft RFC I'm wondering if it's > uni-directional only. Can anyone clarify if this is the

[Lightning-dev] Bi-directional or uni-directional?

2017-11-20 Thread Alan Carbery via Lightning-dev
Hi, All the tutorials that I've read about Lightning describe bi-directional channels. However, reading through the draft RFC I'm wondering if it's uni-directional only. Can anyone clarify if this is the case and if so then is there a reason for not doing bi-directional channels in the first