Author: Subhra Mazumdar 2020-05-05 18:06:14
Published on: 2020-05-05T18:06:14+00:00
From the given context, it is apparent that the user has a query regarding force closure of a channel. The scenario in question involves an HTLC established between parties A and B for transferring funds. However, if B does not have the necessary witness to resolve the HTLC and A suffers a crash fault, B cannot resolve the HTLC due to the lack of a witness. In such a situation, the user asks whether B can close the channel even though there is no way out of resolving the HTLC. This query pertains to the Lightning Network protocol, which is a decentralized protocol that enables transactions between parties without intermediaries. The Lightning Network operates through payment channels, which are opened by the participants to transact with each other. The channels may be closed either cooperatively or forcibly. In case of a force closure, the channel is closed unilaterally by one of the parties and the latest state of the channel is broadcasted to the blockchain. However, in the given scenario, if B forces the closure of the channel, the HTLC will remain unresolved, and the funds in question will be locked up until the timeout period expires. As a result, it is not advisable for B to force close the channel as it will lead to a loss of funds. In conclusion, while force-closing a channel is a possibility in the Lightning Network protocol, it is not recommended in scenarios where an HTLC remains unresolved due to the lack of a witness. Instead, parties should seek to resolve the HTLC before closing the channel.
Updated on: 2023-06-03T01:25:31.230442+00:00