<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1pj9022f74rzq7d5x7gnxje6wpsgk4r5jgeck8y5awd423ydhan3q7x22xp</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1pj9022f74rzq7d5x7gnxje6wpsgk4r5jgeck8y5awd423ydhan3q7x22xp</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2020-10-05&#xA;📝 Original message:&#xA;Hi Bastien,&#xA;&#xA;&gt; I think that *in some cases*, fundees should be paying a portion of the commit-tx on-chain fees,&#xA;&gt; otherwise we may end up with a web-of-trust network where channels would only exist between peers&#xA;&gt; that trust each other, which is quite limiting (I&#39;m hoping we can do better).&#xA;&#xA;Agreed.&#xA;However in an anchor outputs future the funder only pays for the &#34;backbone&#34; fees of the channel and the fees necessary to secure the confirmation of transactions is paid in second stage by each interested party (*). It seems to me to be a reasonable middle-ground.&#xA;&#xA;(*) Credits to ZmnSCPxj for pointing this out to me on IRC.&#xA;&#xA;Darosior&#xA;-------------- next part --------------&#xA;An HTML attachment was scrubbed...&#xA;URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20201005/1f406e21/attachment.html&gt;</html></oembed>