Author: Christian Decker 2017-12-30 23:14:02
Published on: 2017-12-30T23:14:02+00:00
A user named Christian corrected Andy Schroder's comparison with the bitcoin block size, stating that the capacity limit can be changed at any point in time while the bitcoin block size is a consensus critical parameter. Andy had previously mentioned that he was not sure why there was a payment limit if there was already a channel limit. He also expressed concern that large businesses may not be able to operate on lightning since the channel sizes and payment sizes are too small. ZmnSCPxj responded to this by saying that a limit encourages growth towards a mesh network rather than more central forms. Furthermore, they argued that most people following the "wisdom" of keeping most funds in cold storage would not have an incentive to run software with the limit removed. There was also discussion about rejecting large incoming channels since it could potentially put one at risk of being attacked. However, Andy pointed out that Eclair implementation supports push_msat which could be used instead.
Updated on: 2023-05-24T17:14:38.251872+00:00