Topic: The Lightning Network FAQ - page 59. (Read 33714 times)

I created a list of forum users here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54940969

You could also use a site like this to find more: https://explorer.acinq.co/

Hello.

I was trying to find some site like LNBig to open a channel with me so that I have some inbound liquidity but their site always says there there are no free funds to open any channels. I also tried to request, by email, an inbound channel to PeerNode site. But after 3 days I have no answer from them.

Where else can I find someone to open a channel with me so that I can receive satoshis via my c-lightning node? I have Bluewallet installed in my mobile phone and I know it is not compatible with c-lightning, so I have installed Spark wallet in my desktop. So, now, I want to send the sats from Bluewallet to my Sparkwallet and then, eventually, send the sats to BTC address I own.

No not on mainnet anyway.

I'm sure there's some testnet faucet that gives free bitcoin if you wanted to test out invoices there though (preloading a testnet channel).

Thanks a lot jackg, for your reply.

One more thing. I can't wait to start experimenting with my node, but for 5 questions I get the answers, a few more questions arise.

Can I just create an invoice for the sake of experimenting, without opening a channel?

This'll be specific to the node but generally:
Addresses are for receiving funds from the main chain - so it can still act like a regular bitcoin wallet.
Invoices are for lightning transactions.



Invoices on their own are a bit like sending a parcel.

It includes the address + what you want to be sent in a string of characters. They don't have a bearing on channel closures but if someone signs to consent to sending those funds they're then transferred by a series of contracts to their final state that satisfies the invoice.



Yes it is possible to see the address on the chain, if you've opened a channel just look at either the funding transaction or search the address with funds in it on blockchain.com or btc.com and you'll see your funds are transferred there.

YOU and your node control the PKs. A thing is sent called a "Commitment transaction" CT which allows your channel to have a single state you both agree on.

If the other node goes offline, and I've had that happen, you merely broadcast your last commitment transaction and your funds are restored back to your wallet.


This is what commitment transactions are for (opening and closing channels). Invoices only tell someone how much you want them to send, where you want them to send it and how long they have to send it.

Hello everyone.

I'm just starting to learn about Lightning Network.
I'm running a full bitcoin node and I decided to try c-lightning from Elements project in Debian Buster.

I have a few questions that I know are quite noob, but if I understand them right from the beginning, my learning process will be much faster and reliable and also less prone to error.

I'm using solely the command line because I consider that I can learn in much more deep the way the network works and get used/known to the existing commands rather than just use front ends for the node and just get what they give me.

So, I already connected to a few nodes with success behind Tor. I also connected to a firend's node. So, connectivity is all good.

Questions are more theoretical, I guess.

For instance:
1.(a) Do I need any address to receive payments? If we don't need an address, (b) why does c-lightning software has a command to get a new address? If we need one, (c) can it be a bech32?
2. I'm still not sure if invoices are just a name for the action of closing a channel or what is it or how it relates to closing a channel and receiving funds (in a bech32 address, ultimately??).
3. As far as I read, when we open a channel, we implicitly have to fund it. Those funds will remain in a multi-signature address. (a) Is this accurate? (b)If so, can we see that multi-signature address contents in a Blockchain explorer like Blockchair, for instance? (c) I assume that the Lightning Network protocol implicitly controls the PKs of this multi-signature address an that when both parties agree in closing the channel, the software automatically "inserts" both PKs so that the channel can be closed or each one of us needs to provide it manually? (d) Can we see that multi-signature address or is it somehow embedded in the software one is using?
4. An invoice is something we can create separately and then present to any channel/node so that we can send/receive a payment or is it something that is also inherent to opening/closing a channel?

Well, I think most of these questions would be answered by experimenting, but I'm still not confident to try it on my own.

Hope I can get some clarification. I have already read a few links I was given in another thread. FAQ and a kind of an Intro to the LN with some basic concepts.

Nothing in the logs showing anything.
This one is actually not on an RPi but a Virtaulbox VM that I use for testing.
It's why I keep no funds on it and don't do any work on it.

I just use it to test new versions and then if nothing else happens put them on the "live" nodes.

Not going to have time for a few days so not going to worry about it. Once I can carve out two hours I'll open an issue on github.

-Dave

I had this with C-lightning 0.9.1 recently, but it was due to a vast number of channel updates all being gossiped at once. lnd did have a bug where cpu usage got pinned to 100%, but I thought they fixed it in 0.10

So maybe check the lnd logs that it's not expected network behavior overwhelming your hardware (you're using an rpi IIRC).

With the standard, I know to ask on github.
Has anyone had an issue after installing 0.11 of random 100% cpu utilization?
My node just stops and goes to 100% for minutes on end. Then everything goes back to normal.
No funds in it at the moment so I'll probably roll back to 0.10

-Dave

It might be an LND exclusive feature. See the following quote.


Apparently, payments larger than the limit are split into smaller chunks. I am not sure how c-lightning and Eclair would behave in such a situation.

If I got it correctly payments are still limited to 0.0429 4967 295 BTC (2^32-1 msat).

From BOLT #2, update_add_htlc

All major implementations now support "wumbo". It allows node operators to create and accept channels larger than 0.16777215 BTC and payments larger than 0.04294967 BTC. While the vast majority of users won't "go wumbo", operators of large nodes might benefit from it by having to rebalance their channels less often.

Instructions on how to enable "wumbo": LND, c-lightning, Eclair

I'm trying it with 15p because theoretically it could work and may do so I want to try it... My thought is that for a while therell only be one person funding a channel so it might just be credited but it's unlikely - I'm still just curious though.

I'll post my results if it works but even if it does it might just rely on individual configurations.

---

Edit: not entirely sure what happened to t, I woke up with about 200 notifications overnight so I don't remember what it said but it said something like "suspicious activity noticed" as a notification from elcair - I think it might have gone through on the other side and my side just refused to sign for it as a security measure.

No, this is called splice-in (or out - same but decrease channel capacity). See above, it's theoretically possible but not yet spec'ed.

As far as I know, this isn't possible.
A way around this is to use a custodial wallet. This this morning I asked someone to pay to a Bech32-address that goes straight into my BlueWallet LN balance, and by creating a new LN wallet each time, I can use different addresses for this.
Custodial isn't perfect, but for small amounts I don't mind.

Again I am with a question.
When I open a channel, I only use the coins that are in the channel to move them back and forth. If I want to take out some of the coins that have gathered in the channel, I have to close it and open a new one, right?
Can anyone else fund my channel? For example, Bob and Alice have a channel that is 0.001BTC, can Jack transfer 0.0001 coins to Bob and Alice's channel outside the LN and thus increase the channel volume to 0.0011?
The idea is if someone has to send me BTC he can directly fund my channel.

When you are sending a payment via LN, you will not need to deal with any type of change output, therefore you will not need to pay anything to consolidate change outputs, ever. When you spend coin on-chain, you will receive a change output, and eventually you will need to pay to consolidate two or more change outputs. If you have enough other coin, you can send a tx to yourself with a low fee, and hope the txn will eventually confirm (it may not). Or you can pay an increased fee (in terms of blockspace) for a txn that has two inputs and two outputs for something you would normally buy, and in this case you generally need to pay a 'market' fee. In both cases, you are incurring costs in addition to what you would 'normally' incur when dealing with on-chain txns.

You don't even have to time it, you can just wait for fees to drop, and then make a transaction. I know this doesn't guarantee anything for the future, but my counter argument would be fees can rise right after broadcasting any Bitcoin transaction.

Do you consider consolidating UTXOs at 1 sat/byte as the same then? If you can save even more money and enjoy instant payments at the same time just by opening your channel at the right moment then I don't see any problem. It appears to me to be as clever as consolidating inputs.

I would not try to time fee rates when deciding the costs/benefits to opening a LN channel. This would be like saying you have a guaranteed way to make money that is you will 'buy low and sell high'. BTC fee rates may rise and fall over time that follow patterns, but these patterns can end or change at any time.