Author: Anthony Towns 2019-03-22 02:58:46
Published on: 2019-03-22T02:58:46+00:00
In a recent email exchange, ZmnSCPxj and aj discussed the possibility of enforcing timelocks in settlement transactions. ZmnSCPxj suggested using OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY and OP_CHECKDLSVERIFY to ensure that update transactions set their own timelocks and settlement transactions have absolute or relative timelocks via sequence. However, ZmnSCPxj expressed concern over the lack of OP_CSV in the settlement branch. aj responded by explaining that the relative timelock can be enforced simply by refusing to sign a settlement transaction that doesn't have the timelock set. They also noted that settlement-1, which was signed by ZmnSCPxj, is not immediately spendable by update-1 due to BIP-68 being enforced by consensus and NOINPUT sigs committing to nsequence. Overall, the email exchange highlighted the technical details involved in enforcing timelocks in settlement transactions for offchain channels.
Updated on: 2023-05-20T20:02:53.346638+00:00