The remote anchor of anchor channels is redundant

It's argued that if there isn't a to_remote output present, Child Pays for Parent (CPFP) could be a method employed to ensure the transaction progresses. However, it is suggested that even in such scenarios, the to_remote_anchor output may not be required. Instead, initiating the channel with a minimal, dust-sized balance on the to_remote output could be more efficient, as any amount that small would be relinquished regardless.

Furthermore, it's pointed out that a simple public key output is more cost-effective when it comes to spending, should the need arise. This approach also negates the requirement for implementing remote anchor outputs. The insights presented stem from an ongoing analysis of v3 transactions, underscoring both the intricacies and potential improvements in protocol efficiency. For more detailed information or further discussion, contact can be made through the provided email address, which belongs to Peter Todd, a known expert in the field: 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org. His work and findings can also be explored at https://petertodd.org.