Author: ZmnSCPxj 2018-04-05 16:13:19
Published on: 2018-04-05T16:13:19+00:00
The email discusses the limitations of using retaliatory constructions in multi-party cases. In a two-party case, if one party cheats, the other party gets the entire amount they are working on together as a disincentive for cheating. However, in a three-party case, if one party cheats, it becomes complicated to determine how the money should be divided between the other two parties. The email suggests that creating separate retaliatory constructions for each scenario is necessary, but this quickly becomes complex as the number of participants increases. Retaliatory constructions have the advantage of not imposing limits on the number of updates to the offchain "purse", which makes them suitable for channels. Channel factories can use the Duplex construction near the root of the initial onchain anchor transaction and be terminated in Poon-Dryja retaliatory channels. This balance allows for restructuring channels to be rarer compared to updating them normally for normal usage. Thus, the Decker-Wattenhofer construction, which imposes a limit on the number of updates but has no limit on the number of participants, is used for massive "channel restructuring" operations, while the Poon-Dryja construction, which imposes a practical limit on the number of participants but has no limit on the number of updates, is used for "day-to-day" normal operation.
Updated on: 2023-05-24T19:01:12.067946+00:00