Author: Rusty Russell 2018-11-14 20:31:10
Published on: 2018-11-14T20:31:10+00:00
In a message to the Lightning Development mailing list, Joost Jager proposed an idea that builds on top of "non-strict" forwarding. While he commented about this on Conner's non-strict forwarding lightning-rfc pr, he thought it was better to discuss it on its own in this list. The decision was made to allow additional channel_update in the error reply and document that scid is not binding, which would allow extra channel_updates in errors for “upselling”. However, according to Rusty Russell, this is a deeply weird case. If another channel had capacity, it would have been used. If another channel doesn't, sending a channel_update wouldn't help. And if there's a channel available at a higher feerate or longer timeout, it raises the question of why anyone would do that rather than just taking the offer in front of them. The value clearly used to be acceptable, and now people risk others routing around them.
Updated on: 2023-05-25T16:57:51.511713+00:00