📅 Original date posted:2021-12-07
📝 Original message:
I was thinking along the same lines as Z. With MuSig2 and pre-sharing of
signature nonces it should stay three rounds and share a similar structure.
On Tue, 7 Dec 2021 at 11:08, ZmnSCPxj via Lightning-dev <
lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Basically, if my memory and understanding are accurate, in the above, it
> is the *PTLC-offerrer* which provides an adaptor signature.
> That adaptor signature would be included in the `update_add_ptlc` message.
>
Isn't it the case that all previous PTLC adaptor signatures need to be
re-sent for each update_add_ptlc message because the signatures would no
longer be valid once the commit tx changes. I think it's better to put it
in `commitment_signed` if possible. This is what is done with pre-signed
HTLC signatures at the moment anyway.
LL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20211207/894e2b77/attachment.html>;
Lloyd Fournier [ARCHIVE] /
npub1kh…y05yp
2023-06-09 13:04:37
in reply to nevent1q…g05a
Author Public Key
npub1khlhcuz0jrjwa0ayznq2q9agg4zvxfvx5x7jljrvwnpfzngrcf0q7y05ypPublished at
2023-06-09 13:04:37Event JSON
{
"id": "f40af67af32d0d84df5e2ddb1c6b037e0a3e311ce282b3e3f01f23fccf9e71e7",
"pubkey": "b5ff7c704f90e4eebfa414c0a017a84544c32586a1bd2fc86c74c2914d03c25e",
"created_at": 1686315877,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"86d882af7142eecbdb4ce698181b82aaa475c9b46541e1e4831400616b496e77",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"62c683db316955047dd7317ccdaa309a5d64140bec961ec41b841a460bd64469",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4505072744a9d3e490af9262bfe38e6ee5338a77177b565b6b37730b63a7b861"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2021-12-07\n📝 Original message:\nI was thinking along the same lines as Z. With MuSig2 and pre-sharing of\nsignature nonces it should stay three rounds and share a similar structure.\n\nOn Tue, 7 Dec 2021 at 11:08, ZmnSCPxj via Lightning-dev \u003c\nlightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e\n\u003e Basically, if my memory and understanding are accurate, in the above, it\n\u003e is the *PTLC-offerrer* which provides an adaptor signature.\n\u003e That adaptor signature would be included in the `update_add_ptlc` message.\n\u003e\n\nIsn't it the case that all previous PTLC adaptor signatures need to be\nre-sent for each update_add_ptlc message because the signatures would no\nlonger be valid once the commit tx changes. I think it's better to put it\nin `commitment_signed` if possible. This is what is done with pre-signed\nHTLC signatures at the moment anyway.\n\nLL\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20211207/894e2b77/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "ea5a08ba798043c569bfb5efbea015494cec97d8d79ad36ef3d79d222aae74cfcdaeab9f09630c02c26e64c47218a9902ee8420bed32a3b6ac1ac2c458f69351"
}