📅 Original date posted:2023-03-03
📝 Original message:
The benefit is that you can be more precise when blocking. With a binary
solution a single attacker can easily fill your quota of low-confidence
HTLCs and then all low-reputation nodes are blocked. But not all of them
are attackers, some of them just don't send you enough traffic to get a
high reputation for instance and you're going to block them too. With a
continuous solution you can differentiate between an active attacker and
someone who just sends to nodes with poor connectivity and only block the
first.
For reporting c truthfully, if you report it too high you will be penalized
by having your reputation lowered, if you report it too low you will
penalize your HTLCs and still get the same reputation as if you had
reported it truthfully.
Le ven. 3 mars 2023 à 19:45, Clara Shikhelman <clara.shikhelman at gmail.com>
a écrit :
> Could you explain the benefits of continuous solutions over binary? This
> is something we should definitely understand before going in a more
> complicated direction.
>
> Also, I'm still not sure that the rational behaviour is to report *c*
> truthfully.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 11:51 AM Thomas HUET <thomas.huet at acinq.fr> wrote:
>
>> By giving a high confidence to HTLCs you increase the chance that they
>> are relayed which should be your goal. Having a high reputation is not a
>> goal in itself, it's just a way to make your HTLCs more likely to be
>> relayed. If you always report confidence 0, then yes you will have a
>> reputation of 1 but your HTLCs will still be rejected at the first sign of
>> congestion.
>>
>> Le ven. 3 mars 2023 à 17:14, Clara Shikhelman <clara.shikhelman at gmail.com>
>> a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the example.
>>>
>>> - If c < p then yes it gives it a higher reputation but the reputation
>>>> is capped at 1 anyway, so by underestimating the confidence the node
>>>> doesn't gain anything.
>>>>
>>> Is there anything to gain from giving high confidence? By doing this,
>>> you risk lowering your reputation, and it's not clear what you gain.
>>> Could it be that the best selfish strategy is to report confidence 0
>>> (that maps to reputation 1) all the time?
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230303/d15bb113/attachment-0001.html>;
Thomas HUET [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tc…pu5xp
2023-06-09 13:08:17
in reply to nevent1q…s5er
Author Public Key
npub1tcwr7j30p5q4sypnsw4arca9s2433s7wdcpt2z2sk7pkqfsntjds0pu5xpPublished at
2023-06-09 13:08:17Event JSON
{
"id": "633326bfce620e57ee601f139aa4fbf92bc4ecd45bb440c4e0fe660f0866e67d",
"pubkey": "5e1c3f4a2f0d0158103383abd1e3a582ab18c3ce6e02b50950b7836026135c9b",
"created_at": 1686316097,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"5f3e75753e1cd24620a86b3bad62eb6d1c40c5b8648c7be0ec45bcc595380710",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"0329b84836ca740625c36019447244eef471115b95bd2c2b3fd73809a09504fb",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e12e808a938266c6ff00dc723941b2ec1a50b73dccb395b9766737bd6c31e4be"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2023-03-03\n📝 Original message:\nThe benefit is that you can be more precise when blocking. With a binary\nsolution a single attacker can easily fill your quota of low-confidence\nHTLCs and then all low-reputation nodes are blocked. But not all of them\nare attackers, some of them just don't send you enough traffic to get a\nhigh reputation for instance and you're going to block them too. With a\ncontinuous solution you can differentiate between an active attacker and\nsomeone who just sends to nodes with poor connectivity and only block the\nfirst.\n\nFor reporting c truthfully, if you report it too high you will be penalized\nby having your reputation lowered, if you report it too low you will\npenalize your HTLCs and still get the same reputation as if you had\nreported it truthfully.\n\nLe ven. 3 mars 2023 à 19:45, Clara Shikhelman \u003cclara.shikhelman at gmail.com\u003e\na écrit :\n\n\u003e Could you explain the benefits of continuous solutions over binary? This\n\u003e is something we should definitely understand before going in a more\n\u003e complicated direction.\n\u003e\n\u003e Also, I'm still not sure that the rational behaviour is to report *c*\n\u003e truthfully.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 11:51 AM Thomas HUET \u003cthomas.huet at acinq.fr\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e By giving a high confidence to HTLCs you increase the chance that they\n\u003e\u003e are relayed which should be your goal. Having a high reputation is not a\n\u003e\u003e goal in itself, it's just a way to make your HTLCs more likely to be\n\u003e\u003e relayed. If you always report confidence 0, then yes you will have a\n\u003e\u003e reputation of 1 but your HTLCs will still be rejected at the first sign of\n\u003e\u003e congestion.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Le ven. 3 mars 2023 à 17:14, Clara Shikhelman \u003cclara.shikhelman at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e\u003e a écrit :\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Hi Thomas,\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Thanks for the example.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e - If c \u003c p then yes it gives it a higher reputation but the reputation\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\u003e is capped at 1 anyway, so by underestimating the confidence the node\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\u003e doesn't gain anything.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Is there anything to gain from giving high confidence? By doing this,\n\u003e\u003e\u003e you risk lowering your reputation, and it's not clear what you gain.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Could it be that the best selfish strategy is to report confidence 0\n\u003e\u003e\u003e (that maps to reputation 1) all the time?\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230303/d15bb113/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "e5f2e21149761baa4061f3db3b69975a7db1ee14210de1ef8c4f20413c79e95af2abc3f45f742704d670aa65ec8def33f7986d457cedc5855dd93a191a1cebce"
}