The Lightning Network FAQ - page 78.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Rath_ on July 17, 2019, 01:07:46 PM

Sending capacity = Current channel balance - total can receive - minimum channel reserve (that's how I would calculate it, but I am still missing something).

There minimum channel reserve is only 1%. That's probably enough for a channel with high balance, but for my experimental channel with only 1.x mBTC, it's too low. So (I think) the total sending capacity varies depending on the average Bitcoin fee around that time (and I think that's the part you were missing).

Quote

Each time you send a transaction multiple routes are calculated and the most efficient one is chosen. Total possible amount to send differs for each destination node. The problem you described is a liquidity issue; it's not Eclair's fault.

This makes sense

I just couldn't imagine there's no route with enough capacity (it was just around 0.00003 BTC) from my channel (connected to a well-connected node) to the destination (which I assume to be well-connected too).

It's not a problem for an experimental system of course, so I assume this will be improved in future updates.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: ?? on ??

Have the watch towers not yet activated to prevent this stealing of funds?

Watch towers have to be configured manually for each node on a separate machine. They have been recently introduced in the latest LND update so that's why they haven't been mentioned in the article.

Quote from: LoyceV on July 17, 2019, 01:34:29 AM

It also looks like the sending capacity in Eclair isn't that accurate: I can't send all at once, but I could send multiple smaller payments.

Sending capacity = Current channel balance - total can receive - minimum channel reserve (that's how I would calculate it, but I am still missing something). Each time you send a transaction multiple routes are calculated and the most efficient one is chosen. Total possible amount to send differs for each destination node. The problem you described is a liquidity issue; it's not Eclair's fault.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

I'm quite certain now: In Eclair, the amount of LN funds that I can send depends on the Bitcoin network fees! A few days ago, had almost no sending capacity left, and received 30000 sat, and could send just over 30000 sat.. The next day, my sending capacity was reduced to about 24000 sat. I'd say that makes a non-custodial wallet like BlueWallet a better choice for using LN with a small balance, as it doesn't reserve anything for closing-fees.

It also looks like the sending capacity in Eclair isn't that accurate: I can't send all at once, but I could send multiple smaller payments.

I don't blame LN, which is still experimental, but it's good to note these things

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Rath_ on July 16, 2019, 01:38:18 PM

I was thinking of re-creating the Lightning Network Discussion thread but it would have to be self-moderated. I don't want to be accussed of keeping the discussion biased.

If you set clear guidelines in the OP, that should be okay. I'd do it for you, but I don't feel like I know or understand enough of LN to host the thread.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

BitMex Research published an interesting article in which they examine all possible Lightning Network channel closure scenarios.

Quote from: LoyceV on July 15, 2019, 10:34:05 AM

-snip

I don't mind. I was thinking of re-creating the Lightning Network Discussion thread but it would have to be self-moderated. I don't want to be accussed of keeping the discussion biased.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Can I post Pollo Feed here? I've just had my daughter feed some chickens using the Lightning Network!
It's just 1000 satoshi ($0.10), and I love how someone made this just to use the Lightning Network! I found this site on Lightning Network Stores directory.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: Carlton Banks on July 13, 2019, 07:18:29 AM

Quote from: bones261 on July 11, 2019, 10:49:15 AM

hope someone can integrate Libra in LN

that's unlikely

Plus how can developers integrate something that will never launch? Cool

Quote from: bones261 on July 11, 2019, 10:49:15 AM

Since Libra will be based on the blockchain, I would hope someone can integrate Libra in LN too. Also, the merchant can accept BTC and then do an atomic swap for Libra, Tether, or whatever "stablecoin" that they prefer.

Define "blockchain". Because I would say it's a database validated by $10 million dollar "honest" nodes. Hahaha.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: bones261 on July 11, 2019, 10:49:15 AM

hope someone can integrate Libra in LN

that's unlikely

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: Wind_FURY on July 11, 2019, 05:45:06 AM

Or maybe a zero-conf payment network? Cool

Sounds great but that's a false statement. I would rather stick to organized and serialized.

Quote from: bones261 on July 11, 2019, 10:49:15 AM

Since Libra will be based on the blockchain, I would hope someone can integrate Libra in LN too. Also, the merchant can accept BTC and then do an atomic swap for Libra, Tether, or whatever "stablecoin" that they prefer.

I haven't read much about Libra so I can't say if it's possible. Every Bitcoin fork with SegWit support can run the Lightning Network by making a few small changes in its code. It would be better if developers focused on improving the Lightning Network rather than wasting time on supporting another altcoin (assuming it was possible in this case).

bones261

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1828

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Rath_ on July 10, 2019, 01:29:00 PM

Quote from: yojoots on July 10, 2019, 12:51:58 PM

There are significant distinctions between the two, though. For instance, the Lightning payment can be immediately used in a subsequent transaction without waiting for a block confirmation to occur.

Technically, merchants could accept 0-conf transactions which would be instant in such case but that would expose them to double-spending. Instead of believing users, they can set up a Lightning Network node and trust themselves.

Merchants transact in fiat,
Most immediately convert BTC to fiat upon receipt making sure they don't lose money on btc instability.
Lightning network is even worse as the time locks insure no quick fiat conversion.

Meaning if a Merchant does use LN, they do it thru a 3rd party service that offers almost instant fiat conversion.
Otherwise , a small $1000 variance lower in BTC verse fiat could have a devastating effects on their fiat profit margins.

Merchants want stability in price , odds are Libra become more popular than LN with merchants.

If LN is to make inroads with merchants theirs needs to be price stability added.
Find a way to do that, and you could increase merchant adoption.

Since Libra will be based on the blockchain, I would hope someone can integrate Libra in LN too. Also, the merchant can accept BTC and then do an atomic swap for Libra, Tether, or whatever "stablecoin" that they prefer.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Quote from: yojoots on July 10, 2019, 12:51:58 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on July 09, 2019, 02:26:05 AM

I would like some of your reactions/replies. Someone from Bitrefill once said that Lightning is like an "organized - serialized mempool". Any opinions?

I don't think this is a very good description, personally. The only notable similarity between a Lightning Network payment and an vanilla Bitcoin transaction seen in a node's mempool is that neither one has yet been confirmed in a block. There are significant distinctions between the two, though. For instance, the Lightning payment can be immediately used in a subsequent transaction without waiting for a block confirmation to occur.

But the coins are not yet settled in the blockchain, but "suspended" in payment channels. In another way, calling it an organized-serialized mempool is correct. Or maybe a zero-conf payment network? Cool

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: ?? on ??

Merchants transact in fiat,
Most immediately convert BTC to fiat upon receipt making sure they don't lose money on btc instability.
Lightning network is even worse as the time locks insure no quick fiat conversion.

Meaning if a Merchant does use LN, they do it thru a 3rd party service that offers almost instant fiat conversion.

That's basically the same as the current situation: most merchants use a payment processor to take care of the Bitcoin transaction, and get paid directly in fiat. I don't even think the merchant has to choose for LN, once his payment processor accepts it, it gets added just like some merchants accept many different altcoins.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: yojoots on July 10, 2019, 12:51:58 PM

There are significant distinctions between the two, though. For instance, the Lightning payment can be immediately used in a subsequent transaction without waiting for a block confirmation to occur.

Technically, merchants could accept 0-conf transactions which would be instant in such case but that would expose them to double-spending. Instead of believing users, they can set up a Lightning Network node and trust themselves.

yojoots

newbie

Activity: 11

Merit: 7

Quote from: Wind_FURY on July 09, 2019, 02:26:05 AM

I would like some of your reactions/replies. Someone from Bitrefill once said that Lightning is like an "organized - serialized mempool". Any opinions?

I don't think this is a very good description, personally. The only notable similarity between a Lightning Network payment and an vanilla Bitcoin transaction seen in a node's mempool is that neither one has yet been confirmed in a block. There are significant distinctions between the two, though. For instance, the Lightning payment can be immediately used in a subsequent transaction without waiting for a block confirmation to occur.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

I would like some of your reactions/replies. Someone from Bitrefill once said that Lightning is like an "organized - serialized mempool". Any opinions?

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: Rath_ on June 26, 2019, 04:06:04 PM

Watchtowers - they will be responsible for taking care of people attempting to cheat while the other party is offline.

This feature is now available in Lightning Labs' implementation of the Lightning network. Currently, only altruist watchtowers are available. What are they? This kind of watchtowers doesn't take a cut if one party attempts to cheat; all funds are returned to the victim. Reward watchtowers should be available in the next release.

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: Farul on June 30, 2019, 08:52:34 AM

Did That Mean The 1 Satoshi (Rounded Down Satoshi) Is Left Behind On The Multisig Wallet?

Firstly, you wouldn't be able to open such a small channel due to dust limit. Let's assume that numbers are much higher (5000.1 sat and 4999.9 sat). Leaving 1 satoshi would not make any sense (dust limit) so the only reasonable answer is that it would be added to the fee.

Quote from: Farul on June 30, 2019, 08:52:34 AM

What If The Channel Opener [X] Had So Little Balance That Will Not Enough To Pay For Fee? Did [Y] Must Give [X] Some BTC So He Can Pay For The Closing Fee?

By default, the funder [X] is obligated to cover all fees. The fee rate is negotiated before funding a channel and it can be changed anytime if both parties agree. [Y] won't be obligated to cover the closing fee. If the fee is too low then the channel MAY fail. Last commitment transaction will be used in such case.

Quote from: Farul on June 30, 2019, 08:52:34 AM

BTW I See That There's A Minimum Time Limit Before A Party Can Close A Channel(A Party Can't Close A Channel Before XX/XX/XXXX). Did That Achieved By Timelock or by The Lightning Protocol Itself?

I have never heard of such limitation. One should be able to close a channel even before the funding transaction gets confirmed.

Csmiami

copper member

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1325

I'm sometimes known as "miniadmin"

Quote from: Rath_ on June 30, 2019, 01:53:24 PM

Raspberry Pi 4's CPU is much faster than 3B+'s. 1 GB version seems to be priced the same as the third model, at least in my country. If I were you, I would buy 2 GB or 4GB model of Raspberry Pi 4 and HDD rather than 3B+ and SSD. The fourth model has USB 3.0 and gigabit Ethernet unlike previous models. Buy a small SD card only for the OS, either 8 GB or 16 GB one.

Fair enough; difference seems to be of around 20€ using a 1TB HDD and a 2GB pi 4B and 30 if raspberry of 4G. I'll give it some thought while I wait for the retailer to restock (looks like mid-July Undecided

) and if I happen to come accross any more doubts; I'll try to get them solved!

Thanks for the help!

Edit: Just realized that supply cable was not included; price has gone up a bit to around 80€ on Raspberry 4 4Gb without the HDD, against 40€ of Raspberry 3

Rath_

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 3132

Quote from: Csmiami on June 30, 2019, 01:44:55 PM

-snip

Raspberry Pi 4's CPU is much faster than 3B+'s. 1 GB version seems to be priced the same as the third model, at least in my country. If I were you, I would buy 2 GB or 4GB model of Raspberry Pi 4 and HDD rather than 3B+ and SSD. The fourth model has USB 3.0 and gigabit Ethernet unlike previous models. Buy a small SD card only for the OS, either 8 GB or 16 GB one.

Csmiami

copper member

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1325

I'm sometimes known as "miniadmin"

Quote from: Rath_ on June 30, 2019, 01:23:10 PM

What node are you reffering to? Bitcoin Core? If so, then the answer is yes. Lightning Network node? You don't have to open channels but then such node doesn't do anything. In order to route payments, you have to open quite a lot of channels.

Understood, thanks!

Quote from: Rath_ on June 30, 2019, 01:23:10 PM

Raspberry Pi 3B+ is enough to handle Bitcoin Core and Lightning Network node (LND recommended). However, I would recommend you to synchronise with the Bitcoin network on your computer and then copy blockchain data to an external hard drive. Don't use 256 GB memory card. Most of such cards are not designed to handle constant reads and writes. If you haven't bought that model of Raspberry Pi yet then consider buying the latest model (4B) with some extra RAM.

I have not bought yet the hardware, but my budget is quite limited.
I had thought about the flash card being a problem; and the only feasible solution I could find to that is to use an external HDD (or even SSD) rather than a flash card, connected on USB.

Topic: The Lightning Network FAQ - page 78. (Read 33287 times)