📅 Original date posted:2018-01-14
📝 Original message:
Complete n00b question here: if one side of the channel have 100% of the
funds, can the last message give that user complete controll over the
channel (to close it "unilateral" without any interaction from the other
side?
And that way change the fee size when that part want's to close the channel?
Or give the other side the complete controll over a channel if the funds on
one side is less than what is currently needed to close a channel?
Richard
søn. 14. jan. 2018 kl. 13:32 skrev Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org>:
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 10:30:28AM +0900, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> > Hey everybody.
> >
> > Say that the last time we updated channel state, we assumed 40
> satoshi/byte
> > was enough to get confirmed, then I leave the channel for a few weeks,
> come
> > back to find my partner fell off the face of the internet.
> >
> > I perform unilateral close with my output on CSV timelock... but it turns
> > out there’s 500 MB of txes at around 100 satoshi/byte and lets say my
> > transaction will never get confirmed at 40 sat/byte.
> >
> > What course of action can I take?
> >
> > 1. to_local output can't be redeemed until the commitment transaction
> > (which will "never confirm") is confirmed + the CSV timeout.
> > 2. to_remote output probably won't be redeemed as the other person is
> > offline.
> >
> > The only remedy I can think of is hope that the other person comes back
> > online and CPFPs your to_remote output for you... but at that point it
> > would be better for them to just amicably close with normal outputs... so
> > basically your only hope is wait for other person to come online.
> >
> > Since CSV will cause script verification to fail, a CPFP transaction will
> > not be propagated.
> > If we can't CPFP, the CSV timer won't start (it starts once the CSV
> > containing output is confirmed).
> >
> > Seems like a problem.
> >
> > Anyone have any solutions?
>
> While not ideal, you can use out-of-band fee payment mechanisms such as
> https://confirmtx.com and https://pushtx.btc.com to get the transaction
> mined
> without an on-blockchain payment. For that matter, you could use a
> Lightning
> transaction to pay for that service more cheaply than on-chain payments
> those
> existing accelerators currently use.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> _______________________________________________
> Lightning-dev mailing list
> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180114/b202f355/attachment.html>;
Richard [ARCHIVE] /
npub1pf…5w8uc
2023-06-09 12:48:33
in reply to nevent1q…xxur
Author Public Key
npub1pfuluv292vddejefqqcq32z6n99c7n2zyvsl6nv448jse7r898ms45w8ucPublished at
2023-06-09 12:48:33Event JSON
{
"id": "cfabca763061fa3bb35cc2c04eceeaedde789587fa4949f513b236861b2dfab6",
"pubkey": "0a79fe3145531adccb29003008a85a994b8f4d422321fd4d95a9e50cf86729f7",
"created_at": 1686314913,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"e293fc5fb823c14dd2d8c02676a6e31579a209cd0f7c54d7af04d025bc5a25f6",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"4be698720af593709dac1bd3fc0d8a9f1755fc5e8203c49d4bc3ebea7d6ceb54",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"daa2fc676a25e3b5b45644540bcbd1e1168b111427cd0e3cf19c56194fb231aa"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2018-01-14\n📝 Original message:\nComplete n00b question here: if one side of the channel have 100% of the\nfunds, can the last message give that user complete controll over the\nchannel (to close it \"unilateral\" without any interaction from the other\nside?\n\nAnd that way change the fee size when that part want's to close the channel?\n\nOr give the other side the complete controll over a channel if the funds on\none side is less than what is currently needed to close a channel?\n\n\nRichard\n\nsøn. 14. jan. 2018 kl. 13:32 skrev Peter Todd \u003cpete at petertodd.org\u003e:\n\n\u003e On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 10:30:28AM +0900, Jonathan Underwood wrote:\n\u003e \u003e Hey everybody.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Say that the last time we updated channel state, we assumed 40\n\u003e satoshi/byte\n\u003e \u003e was enough to get confirmed, then I leave the channel for a few weeks,\n\u003e come\n\u003e \u003e back to find my partner fell off the face of the internet.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e I perform unilateral close with my output on CSV timelock... but it turns\n\u003e \u003e out there’s 500 MB of txes at around 100 satoshi/byte and lets say my\n\u003e \u003e transaction will never get confirmed at 40 sat/byte.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e What course of action can I take?\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e 1. to_local output can't be redeemed until the commitment transaction\n\u003e \u003e (which will \"never confirm\") is confirmed + the CSV timeout.\n\u003e \u003e 2. to_remote output probably won't be redeemed as the other person is\n\u003e \u003e offline.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e The only remedy I can think of is hope that the other person comes back\n\u003e \u003e online and CPFPs your to_remote output for you... but at that point it\n\u003e \u003e would be better for them to just amicably close with normal outputs... so\n\u003e \u003e basically your only hope is wait for other person to come online.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Since CSV will cause script verification to fail, a CPFP transaction will\n\u003e \u003e not be propagated.\n\u003e \u003e If we can't CPFP, the CSV timer won't start (it starts once the CSV\n\u003e \u003e containing output is confirmed).\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Seems like a problem.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Anyone have any solutions?\n\u003e\n\u003e While not ideal, you can use out-of-band fee payment mechanisms such as\n\u003e https://confirmtx.com and https://pushtx.btc.com to get the transaction\n\u003e mined\n\u003e without an on-blockchain payment. For that matter, you could use a\n\u003e Lightning\n\u003e transaction to pay for that service more cheaply than on-chain payments\n\u003e those\n\u003e existing accelerators currently use.\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Lightning-dev mailing list\n\u003e Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20180114/b202f355/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "6c676444fa20679917178dbd492899f8892c5202a2207500e43d14acdfd60407e20a9c0f8d5ce04e5b092279326186a6622209bd2698c9ef815206c92de8463a"
}