📅 Original date posted:2017-12-15
📝 Original message:
Hi Cristian,
If there is such a great company, BlockStream. and Blockstream runs a
fantastic high quality node, then as a user why should I connect to
any node other than Blockstream?
In this case I dont need to be online all the time and dont need to
monitor the blockchain for anything. I will just believe that
Blockstream will do no bad to me.
Why do I need to drink unnamed cola if there is Pepsi?)) People used
to run emails servers, it is all Gmail now, much more secure and
reliable!
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Christian Decker
<decker.christian at gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me add some more color to the discussion.
>
> If you do not announce the existence of the channel to the wider network
> you can still receive incoming payments, by simply telling the payment
> sender about the channel. This is what is being done in the payment
> request by adding the `r` parameter to the request. You are selectively
> informing the sender about the channel, which can then use that
> information to construct the route (and onion packet) and initiate the
> payment.
>
> Even though you have only one channel, and announce it, people might
> still want to route through you, by using the channel twice: once to
> route to you and then back out from you. While this may seem wasteful,
> it may be useful to hide the real origin/destination of the
> payment. Another scenario for which this is useful is that you are an
> auditor that witnesses the payment while it is being processed, for book
> keeping or similar cases. This would also work for unannounced channels.
>
> So the decision whether to announce a channel is exactly what you're
> looking for. It allows you to do bidirectional payments, and does not
> allow random people to route through you. Implementations might
> eventually add an "endpoint mode" that rejects any HTLC for which the
> node is not the origin or the destination, which would further enforce
> this.
>
> Cheers,
> Christian
Stan Kladko [ARCHIVE] /
npub1hd…v3wes
2023-06-09 12:48:05
in reply to nevent1q…9cf0
Author Public Key
npub1hd494269aenxtnartkwdlwcsa2xvuhtfaufh9kpetuz4m4n86q3qkv3wesPublished at
2023-06-09 12:48:05Event JSON
{
"id": "c866b36be185832b625c6f5327147d7834c956dd9261b1254244d5b0165fca48",
"pubkey": "bb6a5aab45ee6665cfa35d9cdfbb10ea8cce5d69ef1372d8395f055dd667d022",
"created_at": 1686314885,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"81b92590efc5978b0f7574c7b296b0057ffe7b91eab7dae2e0e9c032227845a8",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ecb0727fc671545169a1e2e1308006b51dfe31bd2c615139816948daf482bae2",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"72cd40332ec782dd0a7f63acb03e3b6fdafa6d91bd1b6125cd8b7117a1bb8057"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-12-15\n📝 Original message:\nHi Cristian,\n\nIf there is such a great company, BlockStream. and Blockstream runs a\nfantastic high quality node, then as a user why should I connect to\nany node other than Blockstream?\nIn this case I dont need to be online all the time and dont need to\nmonitor the blockchain for anything. I will just believe that\nBlockstream will do no bad to me.\n\nWhy do I need to drink unnamed cola if there is Pepsi?)) People used\nto run emails servers, it is all Gmail now, much more secure and\nreliable!\n\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Christian Decker\n\u003cdecker.christian at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e Let me add some more color to the discussion.\n\u003e\n\u003e If you do not announce the existence of the channel to the wider network\n\u003e you can still receive incoming payments, by simply telling the payment\n\u003e sender about the channel. This is what is being done in the payment\n\u003e request by adding the `r` parameter to the request. You are selectively\n\u003e informing the sender about the channel, which can then use that\n\u003e information to construct the route (and onion packet) and initiate the\n\u003e payment.\n\u003e\n\u003e Even though you have only one channel, and announce it, people might\n\u003e still want to route through you, by using the channel twice: once to\n\u003e route to you and then back out from you. While this may seem wasteful,\n\u003e it may be useful to hide the real origin/destination of the\n\u003e payment. Another scenario for which this is useful is that you are an\n\u003e auditor that witnesses the payment while it is being processed, for book\n\u003e keeping or similar cases. This would also work for unannounced channels.\n\u003e\n\u003e So the decision whether to announce a channel is exactly what you're\n\u003e looking for. It allows you to do bidirectional payments, and does not\n\u003e allow random people to route through you. Implementations might\n\u003e eventually add an \"endpoint mode\" that rejects any HTLC for which the\n\u003e node is not the origin or the destination, which would further enforce\n\u003e this.\n\u003e\n\u003e Cheers,\n\u003e Christian",
"sig": "5d3e24985bb5a51392c73181c07dc12b1fc23817cac051ce393b24560b91af0b53d3371736fee078e85dd810e1048a02768ba957fca8258c9ac2615b40e8a33d"
}