#zerobasefee

Summary:

Matt Corallo, an expert in the field of Lightning Network (LN), believes that modifying the protocol before conducting comparative analysis and independent implementation of the algorithm integrated into an existing LN implementation is premature. He suggests mapping the base fee to more flow-based-routing-compatible numbers to solve the issue. Additionally, he highlights the need for analyzing where the proposed algorithm may be most optimal in the HTLC-value channel liquidity ratio ranges to use it for large-value payments.Corallo explains how lnd's current approach has some similarities to the flow-based approach in its use of probabilities to quantify the level of uncertainty of internal network channel balances. However, if a client has no prior observations, then it can end up exploring poor routes for a while and eventually hit the default timeout. Therefore, settling on something that appears to improve things in certain scenarios and morphing the protocol around it is a premature declaration of "Mission Accomplished. "A proposal has been made to set the BOLT#7 fee_base_msat value to zero, which would make routing easier by only having one value to optimize. However, this would eliminate the fixed minimum fee, leading to potential issues with payments of small amounts. Instead, it is suggested that a proportional fee be implemented with a minimum payment size of 5000 sats. This approach could also be used when channels become overloaded, and smaller payments are accepted despite the HTLC minimum setting.Fixed costs for forwarding an HTLC are deemed to be small, and eltoo may help reduce these costs, but they still exist, and the opportunity cost of having Bitcoin locked up until the HTLC succeeds/fails remains significant. It is argued that more exploration is needed before such a change is made, as it is unclear how well the current fee structures can handle the proposed changes.

Updated on: 2023-05-23T15:44:26.814551+00:00