ZK-gossip for lightning channel announcements

The discussion opens with considerations on the viability of proof times in cryptographic operations, acknowledging that while proofs can afford to be slower than verifications, there's a practical limit to how long these operations can take, especially on weaker hardware. This concern is balanced against the argument that significant performance improvements could be achieved through optimization, suggesting a nuanced view on what constitutes acceptable performance benchmarks in this context.

Further analysis shifts to the technical specifics of using pk_hash as a method for generating key images, particularly in the context of multisignature (MuSig) setups. The critique centers on the deviation from more traditional practices, such as hashing private keys for single control UTXOs, and raises concerns about the potential for protocol violations or security leaks when public keys are hashed instead. This approach is contrasted with previous standards and questioned in terms of its compatibility with existing protocols and the broader implications for connected systems, highlighting the inherent risks and unintended consequences of altering key image generation methods.

The conversation then delves into the strategic implications of proof creation mechanisms within the Lightning Network (LN). Here, the focus turns to the trade-offs between using channel UTXOs versus other UTXOs for generating proofs. The former approach is scrutinized for potentially introducing extra liquidity costs for LN operators, thus framing the support for MuSig 2-party outputs not only as a technical requirement but also as a financial consideration. This part of the discussion underscores the importance of optimizing network operations without imposing undue burdens on participants, thereby influencing the strategic choices made by developers and network architects.

Lastly, a critical reflection on the decision-making process regarding channel UTXOs reveals an oversight in considering the correlation between sybil-resistance zero-knowledge proofs and channel updates. This insight points to a deeper layer of complexity in designing privacy-preserving cryptographic protocols, where the goal is to maintain the integrity and non-correlation of operations to uphold the "zero-knowledge-ness" of transactions. This aspect of the discussion emphasizes the intricate balance required between technical feasibility, operational efficiency, and privacy considerations in the ongoing development of cryptographic standards and practices.