I'm no expert in LN, but shouldn't this be happening automatically?
In theory, yes, but AFAIK, there are no automagic methods of doing this. I am quite very possibly missing some obscure tool or method that more learned node-ops use (Using RTL as the primary management tool)
It's been my complaint all along (Lighting channel state balancing management), and it's an AI project Rick has started working on for me, after setting up his own Umbrel node, but the ranch project is really barreling along at a speedy pace lately, and, well, Rick and a friend are going to start an apiary, and I'm having a compact track loader delivered, that we purchased, so I'll be clearing land for them to set hives, and wildflower fields flanking the hives next week blah blah etc etc
NGL. Really starting to look forward to enjoying country life. It's fucking beautiful out there. So quiet...
This is so great, really happy for you guys, you deserve all the blessings you can get. I know this is hard work, but just imagine how it's going to be when it's done. Your own little paradise on Earth. Feeling a little envious (in a good way).
Thanks for all the info on LN. I like the AI idea Rick is working on, you could even consider offering the code to the community at some point. What's important is that LN is growing and getting more adoption. It's not really meant to be run by simple users anyway.
I'm no expert in LN, but shouldn't this be happening automatically? I think what the developers should be focusing on, is code that can be run in a set-and-forget mode, without us having to pamper it constantly to keep it in a healthy state. Maybe I'm asking too much, but the way things stand (based on what I'm reading/learning from you guys), operating a LN node is still a messy piece of work. Good thing is that it seems to be gaining more and more ground, despite the lack of user-friendliness.
In a nutshell, no…
At the core of it, LN still has to be profitable to survive. People will always do it for free, but ultimately if they are forced to do it at a loss, they will eventually pull out of go bust…
When you move SATs from one channel to another to rebalance, there has to be a corresponding, channel to balance the transaction…
Node A to Node B to Node C to Node A
In a perfect scenario, that would balance out, but what if Node B has a higher routing fee?.. who will cover that cost?
Sure we can route for free, something we do during a triangle swap. But never happens unless all participants co-operate.
Can explain n more detail if you want…
Thanks for the info, it looks more complicated than what a piece of code can automatically do. Maybe it's safer that way, because having an algorithm do stuff automatically can be a source of instability and even a security risk, and I'm sure the developers know this. Maybe it's just too risky to let a piece of code manage the balancing.
No need to expand more on this, far too busy IRL for me to get involved currently. But it's good to read and learn from the experts out there.