Author: ZmnSCPxj 2019-03-14 11:16:12
Published on: 2019-03-14T11:16:12+00:00
The conversation revolves around the Lightning Network and its fee structure. The discussion begins with the proportional fee for forwarding payments, which is greater if the payment being forwarded is greater. The argument then shifts to the fee's proportionality to the state of the channel and the size of the payment. However, it is concluded that the final state of the channel has a subtractive relationship from the payment size, and the exact mathematical models may not be relevant to pragmatic use of LN.The "standard" solution to balance concerns and manipulations of fee structure is to make the proportional feerate itself proportional to how much the other side owns on the channel. Regardless of whatever mathematical model you use, this will achieve your goal of a balanced channel in the long run, even if it may have some inaccuracies in the short term.It is suggested that JIT Routing is superior to this as it provides direct evidence that rebalancing would be beneficial under the current network conditions. Additionally, balance is not always beneficial, and JIT Routing handles the case of a balanced channel containing 0.75 mBTC on both sides that cannot serve a forwarding request for 1.0 mBTC in either direction by transferring at least 0.25mBTC from some other channel, then serving the forwarding request.
Updated on: 2023-06-02T17:59:01.919078+00:00