Author: ZmnSCPxj 2018-11-07 06:06:07
Published on: 2018-11-07T06:06:07+00:00
In a recent email exchange, ZmnSCPxj expressed concern about doing away with the initiator distinction in certain actions. The initiator of an action is the node that takes the first step in the action. For example, in opening a channel, the node that initiates the channel open is considered the initiator. What ZmnSCPxj wants to preserve in current channel opening is that the initiator of an action should be the one to pay any costs or fees related to that action. This means that in opening a channel, the channel opener pays for all on-chain fees related to opening and closing the channel because they are the initiator of the action. Similarly, for channel splicing, ZmnSCPxj thinks it would be wiser to have the initiator of the splice pay for any on-chain fees related to splicing (and any backoff/failure path if some backoff is needed), even if the other side decides to splice in/out some funds together with the splice. This approach reduces the surface of potential attacks in case of a bad design or implementation of dual-fund-opening and splicing. To engage in the attack, one must be willing to shoulder all the on-chain fees, which hopefully deters most attackers.
Updated on: 2023-05-25T14:18:30.716173+00:00