rich1.0npub1aslmpzentw224n3s6yccru4dq2qdlx7rfudfnqevfck637cjt6esswfqmxhttps://nostr.ae/npub1aslmpzentw224n3s6yccru4dq2qdlx7rfudfnqevfck637cjt6esswfqmxnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2021-10-15 📝 Original message: > > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 09:48:27AM +0200, Joost Jager wrote: > > > > > So how would things work out with a combination of both of the > > > proposals described in this mail? First we make probing free (free as > > > in no liquidity locked up) and then we'll require senders to pay for > > > failed payment attempts too. Failed payment attempts after a > > > successful probe should be extremely rate, so doesn't this fix the ux > > > issue with upfront fees? > > > > Why couldn't a malicious routing node (or group of colluding routing > > nodes) succeed the probe and then fail the payment in order to collect > > the failed payment fee? > > Good observation! > > I propose substantially the same thing here: > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2021-September/003256.html I totally missed that thread, but it is indeed the same thing including the notion that it may make upfront payments palatable! Contains some great additional ideas too. Joost -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20211015/342fb320/attachment.html>