📅 Original date posted:2018-01-29
📝 Original message:
Hi,
One topic I can't seem to find in the BOLTs is how lightning nodes maintain
consensus during or after a fork of the underlying blockchain(s). For
example, channel_announcement messages use a chain_hash, defined as hash of
underlying block chain's genesis block, to identify the currency in use.
Today, one might ask which hash identifies BTC as opposed to BCH?
A more difficult question arises in how existing channels handle
intentional forks which arise after funding of a payment channel.
An even more difficult question arises in the handling of unintentional
forks, as documented for example in BIP 50.
Have these scenarios been analyzed / designed yet, or does that work remain?
Thanks!
Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180129/7b478ccf/attachment.html>;
Benjamin Mord [ARCHIVE] /
npub16y…kjvwy
2023-06-09 12:48:39
in reply to nevent1q…jmq3
Author Public Key
npub16ycdmhx5sct3h37cwvjff8le7qlp9k0ngst5ry5n262j6gkesrssskjvwyPublished at
2023-06-09 12:48:39Event JSON
{
"id": "d173582d6421df54052768f796dfb58d7318f25f6731fea5bc4d928384daf144",
"pubkey": "d130dddcd486171bc7d87324949ff9f03e12d9f3441741929356952d22d980e1",
"created_at": 1686314919,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"a22f4f394e8750077035e6d57db8141269f657f9f629594983226a58dab10e11",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"9456f7acb763eaab2e02bd8e60cf17df74f352c2ae579dce1f1dd25c95dd611c"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2018-01-29\n📝 Original message:\nHi,\n\nOne topic I can't seem to find in the BOLTs is how lightning nodes maintain\nconsensus during or after a fork of the underlying blockchain(s). For\nexample, channel_announcement messages use a chain_hash, defined as hash of\nunderlying block chain's genesis block, to identify the currency in use.\nToday, one might ask which hash identifies BTC as opposed to BCH?\n\nA more difficult question arises in how existing channels handle\nintentional forks which arise after funding of a payment channel.\n\nAn even more difficult question arises in the handling of unintentional\nforks, as documented for example in BIP 50.\n\nHave these scenarios been analyzed / designed yet, or does that work remain?\n\nThanks!\nBen\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180129/7b478ccf/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "33904ec6b67f12601f7d547d9732d6189190428feb5fdae4ec2f6a80a50fe2e1e687e42f12759520d322b693e21b0b29e875b80da072d30713f97b2fbe4d47d1"
}