Author: Anthony Towns 2021-08-16 04:00:48
Published on: 2021-08-16T04:00:48+00:00
In a discussion about lightning routing algorithms on August 15, 2021, developers discussed the problems caused by base fees. While some argued that having base fees made the algorithm intractably slow, others pointed out that base fees have a multiplicative effect as you split payments. They also noted that base+proportional fees paid only on success roughly match the value of forwarding an HTLC, but not the actual costs incurred on failed HTLCs or those that depend on the time a HTLC lasts and vary heavily depending on how many other simultaneous HTLCs there are.The cost to nodes is almost entirely the opportunity cost of not being able to accept other transactions that would come in afterward and pay higher fees. All these costs can be captured equally well (or badly) by just setting a proportional fee and a minimum payment value, according to one developer.Opinions differed on how base fees should be managed going forward. One suggested that if problems are being caused by legitimate payment attempts, the min_htlc_amount could be adjusted, while another suggested shifting towards upfront fees or similar solutions. However, Lisa proposed that 0 not be allowed, and a value >= 0.001 sat be required. There were also different opinions on whether channels that propose non-zero base fees should continue to be gossiped. Some predicted that eventually, base fees will be hardcoded to zero by everyone, and channels proposing non-zero base fees won't be gossiped. However, others disagreed and argued that base fees are necessary to capture node operators' costs.
Updated on: 2023-05-23T15:48:25.665317+00:00