Author: ZmnSCPxj 2018-08-02 03:56:56
Published on: 2018-08-02T03:56:56+00:00
The email conversation between Michael and ZmnSCPxj discusses the differences between Poon-Dryja, Decker-Wattenhofer, and Decker-Osuntokun-Russell channel protocols. Poon-Dryja does not require a soft fork but has practical timeouts on unilateral closes, while Decker-Wattenhofer channels have no toxic waste but require longer timeouts on unilateral closes. Additionally, Decker-Wattenhofer channels can be extended to multi-party Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer channel factories. The new Decker-Osuntokun-Russell protocol combines the benefits of smaller practical timeouts and lack of toxic waste but requires a SIGHASH_NOINPUT_UNSAFE softfork in the base layer. Regarding how Decker-Wattenhofer claims funds when an old state is broadcast, ZmnSCPxj explains that old states cannot be broadcast if new states are already known due to the decrementing timelock on the final contract in the chains. This means that as long as a node is online, old states cannot be published without the new state having been published first. As both the old and new state consume the same UTXO, the publishing of the new state makes it impossible for the old state to be published.
Updated on: 2023-05-25T02:02:42.305666+00:00