Author: Olaoluwa Osuntokun 2018-10-15 19:04:46
Published on: 2018-10-15T19:04:46+00:00
In a discussion on the Lightning-dev mailing list, a member named ZmnSCPxj suggested that a simpler method for splicing should be considered despite its larger on-chain footprint, as they do not see splicing as being as important as AMP or watchtowers. They mention that payment decorrelation affects how AMP can be implemented, making it a higher priority. However, another member named Rusty argues that splicing is still important and suggests brainstorming possible failure modes during splice and how to recover from them. The lack of a non-blocking splice is seen as a big drawback by ZmnSCPxj. The two methods for splicing are debated, but Rusty suggests that getting some splicing design out, even if imperfect, would be better than not having any. Laolu suggests lifting the "pre-seating of inputs" concept from the multiple funding output approach, which allows clients to generate addresses that others could deposit to and then have be spliced directly into the channel. Public derivation can be used along with a script template to do it non-interactively, with the clients picking up these deposits and initiating a splice in as needed.
Updated on: 2023-05-20T08:46:45.750293+00:00