The Lightning Network FAQ - page 44.

alexrossi

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1742

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: DaveF on May 15, 2021, 08:22:20 AM

Quote from: alexrossi on May 15, 2021, 07:56:09 AM

So basically, per protocol, a node behind nat, even if it's connected to a public node, doesn't become able to receive routed payments. It just stay private, correct?

Yes, that is with just about anything behind NAT without port forwarding.

You have a public IP, behind the router that is in front your can have just about any number of devices. When a packet of data hits the public IP, if the firewall / router does not know what to do with it, they drop / discard it. If there is port forwarding running, it knows that data coming in on port X goes to a certain device on the private side.

There are some automated ways of doing this, and some other trickery to work around it but none of them are 100% reliable.

-Dave

To have a better understandment of this, I try to make this analogy: is LN like an OSPF (link state) network topology, where each node, at least when it send a tx, needs to know the entire route, reaching the destination when being able of opening a TCP socket with the last peer?

Is not like a distance vector network topology, where a node just need to know the state of the nearest peer and not the entire path, correct?

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: alexrossi on May 15, 2021, 07:56:09 AM

So basically, per protocol, a node behind nat, even if it's connected to a public node, doesn't become able to receive routed payments. It just stay private, correct?

Yes, that is with just about anything behind NAT without port forwarding.

You have a public IP, behind the router that is in front your can have just about any number of devices. When a packet of data hits the public IP, if the firewall / router does not know what to do with it, they drop / discard it. If there is port forwarding running, it knows that data coming in on port X goes to a certain device on the private side.

There are some automated ways of doing this, and some other trickery to work around it but none of them are 100% reliable.

-Dave

alexrossi

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1742

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: DaveF on May 15, 2021, 07:48:21 AM

Quote from: alexrossi on May 15, 2021, 07:08:35 AM

Question:
.....
If I try to send a routed payment from coingate to electrum, even having capacity on both the raspiblitz and coingate, it cannot be completed.

Ex: LN COINGATE > LN RASPIBLITZ > LN ELECTRUM

I suspect that this could be a nat problem, but I thought that since electrum has a permanent TCP socket open with the raspiblitz, it would become reachable even behind NAT, to receive routed payments.

Is it possible to forward port 9735 from the public to the private side?
I do not think NAT will work since your router / firewall will just dump incoming packets that it does not know how to route and lnd does not use any form of upnp.

If you cannot forward the port there is always the option to use TOR.

-Dave

So basically, per protocol, a node behind nat, even if it's connected to a public node, doesn't become able to receive routed payments. It just stay private, correct?

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: alexrossi on May 15, 2021, 07:08:35 AM

Question:
.....
If I try to send a routed payment from coingate to electrum, even having capacity on both the raspiblitz and coingate, it cannot be completed.

Ex: LN COINGATE > LN RASPIBLITZ > LN ELECTRUM

I suspect that this could be a nat problem, but I thought that since electrum has a permanent TCP socket open with the raspiblitz, it would become reachable even behind NAT, to receive routed payments.

Is it possible to forward port 9735 from the public to the private side?
I do not think NAT will work since your router / firewall will just dump incoming packets that it does not know how to route and lnd does not use any form of upnp.

If you cannot forward the port there is always the option to use TOR.

-Dave

alexrossi

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 1742

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Question:

I've a public node (raspiblitz) with public IP, and with this node i'm able to interact in both ways (sending and receiving) without problems, even with routed payments.

To try LN better, i've also opened a LN wallet/node with electrum, on a connection behind a NAT. I've then opened a channel from electrum to the raspiblitz

Now the problem:

If I try to send a routed payment from electrum to... let's say coingate, no problem.

Ex: LN ELECTRUM (BEHIND NAT) > LN RASPIBLITZ > LN COINGATE

If I try to send a payment from the raspiblitz to electrum, also no problem

Ex: LN RASPIBLITZ > LN ELECTRUM

If I try to send a routed payment from coingate to electrum, even having capacity on both the raspiblitz and coingate, it cannot be completed.

Ex: LN COINGATE > LN RASPIBLITZ > LN ELECTRUM

I suspect that this could be a nat problem, but I thought that since electrum has a permanent TCP socket open with the raspiblitz, it would become reachable even behind NAT, to receive routed payments.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: Timelord2067 on May 10, 2021, 05:54:11 AM

Quote from: Rath_ on May 10, 2021, 03:03:32 AM

Quote from: Timelord2067 on May 09, 2021, 06:21:48 AM

I'm pretty sure that's a part of the point Frankie was trying to make a week or two ago and got shouted down for their efforts.

You can see his deleted posts here. He was mostly arguing about Lightning not being Bitcoin.

Mostly, but not exclusively.

He also debated, almost commanded everyone to listen and accept because it’s “true” and a “fact”, that Lightning transactions are IOUs. It’s laughable to think because opening a channel requires an onchain transaction. They are literally Bitcoin transactions that haven’t been settled onchain yet.

Timelord2067

legendary

Activity: 3696

Merit: 2219

💲🏎️💨🚓

Quote from: Rath_ on May 10, 2021, 03:03:32 AM

Quote from: Timelord2067 on May 09, 2021, 06:21:48 AM

I'm pretty sure that's a part of the point Frankie was trying to make a week or two ago and got shouted down for their efforts.

You can see his deleted posts here. He was mostly arguing about Lightning not being Bitcoin.

Mostly, but not exclusively.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3139

Quote from: Karartma1 on April 30, 2021, 07:54:44 AM

I wouldn't know where that could be done honestly, there are countless threads on LN and no one seems to fit. And I don't want to open then next Lightning Network thread on that also. [...] Maybe the post will get indexed and those who are interested will find it.

Thanks for your suggestion. I will probably overhaul this thread at some point. Still, I think that there are plenty of YouTube videos and Medium articles showing such basics. Although, I am not sure how up-to-date they are since I didn't look at any of them in a long time.

Quote from: PrimeNumber7 on May 09, 2021, 05:36:15 AM

I don't think taproot is needed for this.

Sure, but with Taproot, no one will be able to tell if coins were locked up in a channel (unless that channel ends up being closed uncooperatively). That's a significant privacy enhancement.

Quote from: Timelord2067 on May 09, 2021, 06:21:48 AM

I'm pretty sure that's a part of the point Frankie was trying to make a week or two ago and got shouted down for their efforts.

You can see his deleted posts here. He was mostly arguing about Lightning not being Bitcoin.

Timelord2067

legendary

Activity: 3696

Merit: 2219

💲🏎️💨🚓

Quote from: LoyceV on May 08, 2021, 05:42:38 AM

In a way, a custodial LN wallet is a mixer already. The only thing they'd have to add, is deleting all records after a transaction was made.
For a wallet that's not very practical, but if you're willing to trust a third party to mix funds, you can just as well use a wallet that does everything for you.

I'm pretty sure that's a part of the point Frankie was trying to make a week or two ago and got shouted down for their efforts.

PrimeNumber7

copper member

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1901

Amazon Prime Member #7

Quote from: Wind_FURY on May 08, 2021, 03:48:33 AM

Lightning service idea. After Taproot is activated, what about a tumbler/mixer built, and developed for the Lightning Network. You can’t force coffee drinkers to spend their Bitcoin, but you can make thouasands of Heroine dealers move their Bitcoin through a Lightning tumber. Can be more efficient through Lightning, or just making it more complicated?

I don't think taproot is needed for this.

In order to mix your coin, you will need two channels, one with outbound capacity, and one with inbound capacity in the same amount. Once you have the two channels open, you simply make a LN payment from one node to the other. You can increase your privacy by sending multiple payments from one node to the other over time. Privacy will also be increased as more users use the LN network for more transactions. Privacy can be increased by having both nodes have multiple channels open, by not transferring the entire balance in the channel, and by waiting an amount of time before closing the channels.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: ?? on ??

Might be difficult/not practical, because
1. Since LN require you to connect to another node (which mean both party know each other IP), the usage of Tor/VPN will be important. It means you need to use system-wide VPN or LN wallet which support Tor.
~
3. Depending on how it works, you need specific LN wallet.

In a way, a custodial LN wallet is a mixer already. The only thing they'd have to add, is deleting all records after a transaction was made.
For a wallet that's not very practical, but if you're willing to trust a third party to mix funds, you can just as well use a wallet that does everything for you.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Lightning service idea. After Taproot is activated, what about a tumbler/mixer built, and developed for the Lightning Network. You can’t force coffee drinkers to spend their Bitcoin, but you can make thouasands of Heroine dealers move their Bitcoin through a Lightning tumber. Can be more efficient through Lightning, or just making it more complicated?

Karartma1

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 1422

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Karartma1 on April 29, 2021, 07:42:17 AM

https://starblocks.acinq.co/
Just found this awesome live shop free to use to have a first hand experience of the Lightning Network (testnet). I showed it to a few friends (skeptical about Bitcoin in general and LN in particular) and they were gobsmacked at the end.
Could it make sense to add it to OP for those who want to test it without getting hurt?

The website is still alive? I remember few years ago where i used it as part of testing LN and was popular to trying LN.

But since OP don't mention how to use/try LN, maybe it's better to mention it on different LN thread.

I wouldn't know where that could be done honestly, there are countless threads on LN and no one seems to fit. And I don't want to open then next Lightning Network thread on that also.
I think it's a great way to show the overall LN experience even if it's only on testnet.
Maybe the post will get indexed and those who are interested will find it.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: Karartma1 on April 29, 2021, 07:42:17 AM

https://starblocks.acinq.co/
Just found this awesome live shop free to use to have a first hand experience of the Lightning Network (testnet). I showed it to a few friends (skeptical about Bitcoin in general and LN in particular) and they were gobsmacked at the end.
Could it make sense to add it to OP for those who want to test it without getting hurt?

That strengthens in my belief that Lightning Network adoption is more of a UI/UX, and a business development problem, than a tech problem. I believe Lightning Labs should hire a good consultant, and start talking to exchanges to actually start using Lightning.

Karartma1

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 1422

https://starblocks.acinq.co/
Just found this awesome live shop free to use to have a first hand experience of the Lightning Network (testnet). I showed it to a few friends (skeptical about Bitcoin in general and LN in particular) and they were gobsmacked at the end.
Could it make sense to add it to OP for those who want to test it without getting hurt?

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Rath_ on April 28, 2021, 01:56:02 PM

Quote from: DaveF on April 28, 2021, 07:10:02 AM

They might have added it, but since I am doing regular VM replications it's not up there on my list of things to check.

Aren't you worried that your VM backup might not reflect the latest state of some channel? Keep in mind that channels are updated not only when you send/receive transactions but also when you route payments.

By the way, the fee of the latest commitment transaction is periodically updated. I have two channels which have never been used. The first one was updated 19 times and the other one 31 times. I am not sure what would happen if I launched my node with an old backup of my channel database. Would a different fee be enough to trigger an uncooperative channel close?

Yes, but since it's triggered hourly it's not THAT big a risk.

I actually just did another look around ant people have written / added some auto backup functionality to some of them. But nothing that I found is a nice neat auto backup with a pretty front end which is what I think a lot of people who are using nodes in a box want. Click this box, add this info, and poof you channel info is backed up every time there is a change.

-Dave

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3139

Quote from: DaveF on April 28, 2021, 07:10:02 AM

They might have added it, but since I am doing regular VM replications it's not up there on my list of things to check.

Aren't you worried that your VM backup might not reflect the latest state of some channel? Keep in mind that channels are updated not only when you send/receive transactions but also when you route payments.

By the way, the fee of the latest commitment transaction is periodically updated. I have two channels which have never been used. The first one was updated 19 times and the other one 31 times. I am not sure what would happen if I launched my node with an old backup of my channel database. Would a different fee be enough to trigger an uncooperative channel close?

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Rath_ on April 28, 2021, 02:37:35 AM

Quote from: PrimeNumber7 on April 11, 2021, 05:46:43 PM

The above principles are important if LN is going to be successful. LN wallet software needs to have a good mechanism for not losing the latest channel state, and associated transactions if it will be successful.

I would like to point out a very important thing for node operators. In this post, I talked about what could possibly happen if you lost your channel database and decided to use a Static Channel Backup (SCB). Long story short, you should close channels which are offline for extended periods of time. Otherwise, you might not be able to get your coins back if your node's hardware ever failed.

I looked a while ago, but did not find any of the "nodes in a box" that did automated offside backup.
Have to check again. They might have added it, but since I am doing regular VM replications it's not up there on my list of things to check.
But for those people who are using physical ones it would probably be very useful.

-Dave

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3139

Quote from: PrimeNumber7 on April 11, 2021, 05:46:43 PM

The above principles are important if LN is going to be successful. LN wallet software needs to have a good mechanism for not losing the latest channel state, and associated transactions if it will be successful.

I would like to point out a very important thing for node operators. In this post, I talked about what could possibly happen if you lost your channel database and decided to use a Static Channel Backup (SCB). Long story short, you should close channels which are offline for extended periods of time. Otherwise, you might not be able to get your coins back if your node's hardware ever failed.

Quote from: DaveF on April 12, 2021, 08:14:21 PM

Not that it matters that much, but all the pre-done ones that I know of are running LND so over time C-lightning could wind up being a much smaller player.
I like the C-lightning plugins idea, but LND seems to be more widely used.

I originally planned to use c-lightning, but I really liked how well LND integrates with Zap. I can easily spend coins from my node and open new channels without using a command line. Spark Wallet supports c-lightning, but it looks less appealing to me. I have used both LND and c-lightning before and I had a very similar (good) experience.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: ABCbits on April 07, 2021, 06:23:25 AM

Besides, there are many thread which mainly not about Bitcoin, but still on "Development & Technical Discussion" board. Some examples from current first page,

I'd argue that the majority of those topics are more about "development" (except for this first one) and fall under this boards scope.

Quote from: Rath_ on April 07, 2021, 06:29:49 AM

Liquid Network cannot work without third-party. You can exchange BTC to L-BTC on your own, but you won't be able to convert it back without Liquid Federation member's help. Liquid Network transactions are not instantaneous. Every minute, a new block is generated by one of the Functionaries and signed by the majority of other Functionaries. Functionaries are selected among the members of the Liquid Federation.

This is probably the single biggest reason why we're not seeing more Liquid transactions, more than the fact (idea?) that Liquid Federation is a closed membership entity. And L-BTC is something that can be positively called an altcoin.

Quote from: ?? on ??

lightning is not a feature of bitcoin. its a separate network from bitcoin. its a network that is compatible to multiple altcoins.

*Provided that you design the HLTCs for the altcoin in question yourself

LN is officially just a bunch of HLTCs, which itself is just a bunch of scripts - the rest of the parts like routing were never standardized in a white paper and are just different peoples' implementation AFAIK - so its hard to make a claim of it being an entire network.

Topic: The Lightning Network FAQ - page 44. (Read 33677 times)