đ
Original date posted:2015-09-15
đ Original message:
Hello,
I know there hasn't been much work on routing yet (not that I am aware of
at least), but it seems there is a consensus around the fact that the
target network topology would look like this :
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/acinq/public/lightning_network_1.svg
implying that :
- there would exist multiple paths to a target user
- reaching a target user would require several hops
- some nodes might even be connected only to nodes
This puzzles me because the network topology I expected would look more
like this :
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/acinq/public/lightning_network_2.svg
I am not saying each node should be aware of every other node, but that :
- nodes connected only to nodes shouldn't exist
- when user A sends a payment to user B, it goes through at most 2 nodes,
or just 1 if A and B are connected to the same node
The reason for that is there is an incentive for reducing the number of
hops right ? Because it is faster (each hop adds latency) and cheaper (each
hop adds a fee).
With that in mind, why would routing be more complicated than just
<user-id>@<node> ? Then we just agree on a standard port and that's it !
Isn't it how the internet works already ? Why do we need an
application-level routing on top of the IP routing ?
Now that I made a fool of myself, please correct me :-)
Cheers
Pierre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20150915/90a42603/attachment.html>;
Pierre [ARCHIVE] /
npub1yzâŚy4pdt
2023-06-09 12:44:23
in reply to nevent1qâŚ5676
Author Public Key
npub1yz88535e0ydqye9q9x8l5cz9d3g6ervfjgyk5xm88zvktmxvstlsuy4pdtPublished at
2023-06-09 12:44:23Event JSON
{
"id": "c08cb663cc4484d970acb5990dd165f7806a5a3b355eb7ddbdbb46862020adf6",
"pubkey": "208e7a4699791a0264a0298ffa60456c51ac8d8992096a1b67389965eccc82ff",
"created_at": 1686314663,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"e30888c316cb21a0a57c5353314fc0c9ae031f18ec5030b6dd82456c5a7c9f25",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"9456f7acb763eaab2e02bd8e60cf17df74f352c2ae579dce1f1dd25c95dd611c"
]
],
"content": "đ
Original date posted:2015-09-15\nđ Original message:\nHello,\n\nI know there hasn't been much work on routing yet (not that I am aware of\nat least), but it seems there is a consensus around the fact that the\ntarget network topology would look like this :\nhttps://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/acinq/public/lightning_network_1.svg\n\nimplying that :\n- there would exist multiple paths to a target user\n- reaching a target user would require several hops\n- some nodes might even be connected only to nodes\n\nThis puzzles me because the network topology I expected would look more\nlike this :\nhttps://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/acinq/public/lightning_network_2.svg\n\nI am not saying each node should be aware of every other node, but that :\n- nodes connected only to nodes shouldn't exist\n- when user A sends a payment to user B, it goes through at most 2 nodes,\nor just 1 if A and B are connected to the same node\n\nThe reason for that is there is an incentive for reducing the number of\nhops right ? Because it is faster (each hop adds latency) and cheaper (each\nhop adds a fee).\n\nWith that in mind, why would routing be more complicated than just\n\u003cuser-id\u003e@\u003cnode\u003e ? Then we just agree on a standard port and that's it !\nIsn't it how the internet works already ? Why do we need an\napplication-level routing on top of the IP routing ?\n\nNow that I made a fool of myself, please correct me :-)\n\nCheers\n\nPierre\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20150915/90a42603/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "7f9eac0c45b6b081f3657515dd603de989ecc26e3784daf99ccdea72dcea7556905a6b854f5ed34b51d65f304a59042fafd8456b2167e33ee8f65f352badd26a"
}