Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-12-03 Thread Rusty Russell
lisa neigut writes: >> The receiving node MUST fail the channel if: >>... >>- `option_dual_fund` has been negotiated. >> > > Does v2 of channel open necessarily deprecate the original between two > upgraded nodes? > > This seems more sane than having both as an option...will update. Yes.

Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-12-03 Thread lisa neigut
> > > >++ ++ > > where node A is the ‘initiator’ and node B is the ‘dual-funder’ > > We currently use the terms funder and fundee, which are now > inaccurate ofc. Perhaps 'opener' and 'accepter' are not great english, > but they map to the messages well?

Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-12-02 Thread Rusty Russell
ZmnSCPxj writes: >> 128-bit seed in >> open_channel2 could be added, with sorting by SHA(seed | > input> | ) and SHA(seed | )? > > `open_channel2` contains a good amount of entropy --- temporary channel ID, > various basepoints. > Would not hashing `open_channel2` to get this `seed` be

Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-11-29 Thread ZmnSCPxj via Lightning-dev
> 128-bit seed in > open_channel2 could be added, with sorting by SHA(seed | input> | ) and SHA(seed | )? `open_channel2` contains a good amount of entropy --- temporary channel ID, various basepoints. Would not hashing `open_channel2` to get this `seed` be sufficient? Regards, ZmnSCPxj > >

Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-11-29 Thread Rusty Russell
lisa neigut writes: > Hello fellow Lightning devs! > > What follows is a draft for the new dual funding flow. Note that the > `option_will_fund_for_food` specification has been omitted for this draft. Hi! Wow, my mailer really mangled this! I've liberally demangled below as I quote. The

Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-11-29 Thread Rusty Russell
lisa neigut writes: >> * [`2`:`scriptlen`] >> >> * [`scriptlen`:`script`] >> >> * [`2`:`max_extra_witness_len`] >> >> * [`2`:`wscriptlen`] >> >> * [`wscriptlen`:`wscript`] >> >> >> `script` here is the `scriptPubKey`? This is needed for `hashPrevouts` in >> BIP143 I believe. >> >> What is

Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-11-28 Thread lisa neigut
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 11:26 PM ZmnSCPxj wrote: > Good morning Lisa, > > Minor comments only, have not studied in detail: > > > > `accept_channel2`: > > [32:temporary_channel_id] > > … // unchanged > > [33:first_per_commitment_point] > > [?: options_tlv] > > options_tlv: > >1. > >

Re: [Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-11-27 Thread ZmnSCPxj via Lightning-dev
Good morning Lisa, Minor comments only, have not studied in detail: > `accept_channel2`: > > [32:temporary_channel_id] > > … // unchanged > > [33:first_per_commitment_point] > > [?: options_tlv] > > options_tlv: > > - > > Type: 1 `option_upfront_shutdown_script` > >[2:len] > >

[Lightning-dev] Dual Funding Proposal

2018-11-27 Thread lisa neigut
Hello fellow Lightning devs! What follows is a draft for the new dual funding flow. Note that the `option_will_fund_for_food` specification has been omitted for this draft. = Proposal Create a new channel open protocol set (v2), with three new message types: `funding_puts2`,