Author: ZmnSCPxj 2018-11-17 22:55:12
Published on: 2018-11-17T22:55:12+00:00
In a recent discussion on the Lightning-dev mailing list, ZmnSCPxj proposed that wumbo channels should also allow for wumbo payments. This would be especially useful if the bit is signaled globally and would indicate the willingness of nodes to forward larger payments up to their max_htlc limit within the channel_update for that link. However, Laolu pointed out an inconsistency in the newer-ish section of the spec concerning the optional max_htlc value. The value should be below the max capacity of the channel but makes no reference to the current (pre-wumbo) _max HTLC limit_. As a result, one may interpret signaling of the optional field as eligibility to route wumbo payments in a pre-wumbo channel world. ZmnSCPxj also noted that much of the wumbo payments would be implemented by AMP. If there is no direct path of wumborama nodes from payer to payee, then wumbo payments will have to be done by AMP. It would be nice if we could have AMP merge into intermediate nodes instead of always at the destination, so that only the suffix of the path needs to be wumborama. Certainly, this would be less of an issue as more nodes signal wumborama; we know from previous user behavior that they will be #reckless and enable wumborama as soon as it is implemented. Rusty Russell chimed in with a suggestion to name `option_anyone_can_wumbo` to `option_wumborama`. Overall, the discussion focused on how to ensure that wumbo channels and payments are properly implemented and how to address any inconsistencies in the spec.
Updated on: 2023-05-25T16:24:01.626077+00:00