Author: ZmnSCPxj 2019-04-01 04:04:44
Published on: 2019-04-01T04:04:44+00:00
The issue discussed in this context is the compatibility of HMAC with the hops_data field in Rendezvous Routing. The concern is whether the packet that reaches the next trampoline would still have a valid HMAC if more than one intermediate node is inserted to reach the next trampoline. The filler data generated by the current trampoline may cause different filler data to be XORed with the 0x00 data added to left-shift the data at each intermediate node. The author provides an example to explain the process and expresses uncertainty about their explanation. The author proposes a different fee mechanism, which involves sending nodes offering a fee for successful routing. Every routing node could decide how much fee it would collect for forwarding. However, this would require that intermediate nodes know the ultimate destination of the payment, and there are concerns about how intermediate nodes would find out which next hop would be reasonable. Finally, the author suggests that unless there is a massive change to the onion packet construction, the pushed-out packet will no longer be recoverable and cannot be re-encrypted except by A.
Updated on: 2023-06-02T18:06:48.305664+00:00