<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1aslmpzentw224n3s6yccru4dq2qdlx7rfudfnqevfck637cjt6esswfqmx</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1aslmpzentw224n3s6yccru4dq2qdlx7rfudfnqevfck637cjt6esswfqmx</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2022-07-01&#xA;📝 Original message:&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; Path-finding algorithms that are currently in use generally don’t support&#xA;&gt; negative fees. But in this case, the sum of inbound and outbound fees is&#xA;&gt; still positive and therefore not a problem. If routing nodes set their&#xA;&gt; policies accidentally or intentionally so that the sum of fees turns out&#xA;&gt; negative, senders can just round up to zero and find a path as normal.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&#xA;Correction to this:&#xA;&#xA;The sum of inbound and outbound are not the fees set by one single routing&#xA;node. When path-finding considers a candidate hop, this adds the outbound&#xA;fee of the &#34;from&#34; node and the inbound fee of the &#34;to&#34; node. Because those&#xA;nodes don&#39;t necessarily coordinate fees, it may happen more often that the&#xA;fee goes negative. Rounding up to zero is still a quick fix and better than&#xA;ignoring inbound fees completely.&#xA;-------------- next part --------------&#xA;An HTML attachment was scrubbed...&#xA;URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20220701/632a50ce/attachment.html&gt;</html></oembed>