<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1vjzmc45k8dgujppapp2ue20h3l9apnsntgv4c0ukncvv549q64gsz4x8dd</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1vjzmc45k8dgujppapp2ue20h3l9apnsntgv4c0ukncvv549q64gsz4x8dd</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2023-02-16&#xA;📝 Original message:&#xA;Yeah definitely looking forward to talk more about highly available&#xA;lightning channels. During next LN channel jamming meetup! .&#xA;&#xA;Le jeu. 16 févr. 2023 à 00:43, Matt Corallo &lt;lf-lists at mattcorallo.com&gt; a&#xA;écrit :&#xA;&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; On 2/14/23 11:36 PM, Joost Jager wrote:&#xA;&gt; &gt;     But how do you decide to set it without a credit relationship? Do I&#xA;&gt; measure my channel and set the&#xA;&gt; &gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt;     bit because the channel is &#34;usually&#34; (at what threshold?) saturating&#xA;&gt; in the inbound direction? What&#xA;&gt; &gt;     happens if this changes for an hour and I get unlucky? Did I just&#xA;&gt; screw myself?&#xA;&gt; &gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt; As a node setting the flag, you&#39;ll have to make sure you open new&#xA;&gt; channels, rebalance or swap-in in&#xA;&gt; &gt; time to maintain outbound liquidity. That&#39;s part of the game of running&#xA;&gt; an HA channel.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; Define &#34;in time&#34; in a way that results in senders not punishing you for&#xA;&gt; not meeting your &#34;HA&#xA;&gt; guarantees&#34; due to a large flow. I don&#39;t buy that this results in anything&#xA;&gt; other than pressure to&#xA;&gt; add credit.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt;      &gt; How can you be sure about this? This isn&#39;t publicly visible data.&#xA;&gt; &gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt;     Sure it is! https://river.com/learn/files/river-lightning-report.pdf&#xA;&gt; &gt;     &lt;https://river.com/learn/files/river-lightning-report.pdf&gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt; Some operators publish data, but are the experiences of one of the most&#xA;&gt; well connected (custodial)&#xA;&gt; &gt; nodes representative for the network as a whole when evaluating payment&#xA;&gt; success rates? In the end&#xA;&gt; &gt; you can&#39;t know what&#39;s happening on the lightning network.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; Right, that was my above point about fetching scoring data - there&#39;s three&#xA;&gt; relevant &#34;buckets&#34; of&#xA;&gt; nodes, I think - (a) large nodes sending lots of payments, like the above,&#xA;&gt; (b) &#34;client nodes&#34; that&#xA;&gt; just connect to an LSP or two, (c) nodes that route some but don&#39;t send a&#xA;&gt; lot of payments (but do&#xA;&gt; send *some* payments), and may have lots or not very many channels.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; (a) I think we&#39;re getting there, and we don&#39;t need to add anything extra&#xA;&gt; for this use-case beyond&#xA;&gt; the network maturing and improving our scoring algorithms.&#xA;&gt; (b) I think is trivially solved by downloading the data from a node in&#xA;&gt; category (a), presumably the&#xA;&gt; LSP(s) in question (see other branch of this thread)&#xA;&gt; (c) is trickier, but I think the same solution of just fetching&#xA;&gt; semi-trusted data here more than&#xA;&gt; sufficies. For most routing nodes that don&#39;t send a lot of payments we&#39;re&#xA;&gt; talking about a very small&#xA;&gt; amount of payments, so trusting a third-party for scoring data seems&#xA;&gt; reasonable.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; Once we do that, everyone gets a similar experience as the River report :).&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; Matt&#xA;&gt; _______________________________________________&#xA;&gt; Lightning-dev mailing list&#xA;&gt; Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org&#xA;&gt; https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev&#xA;&gt;&#xA;-------------- next part --------------&#xA;An HTML attachment was scrubbed...&#xA;URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20230217/a4c356bf/attachment.html&gt;</html></oembed>