In-protocol liquidity probing and channel jamming mitigation

Oct 15 - Oct 15, 2021

  • In this context, C realizes that B is lying but faces a dilemma.

He can either say no because he knows that B is lying or say yes and get some free sats from the failed payment. However, if B cannot forward an HTLC to C later, then C cannot have a failed payment and cannot earn any money from the upfront payment scheme. Even though there is still a positive incentive for continuing the lie, C decides to keep the lie going for his benefit. D, the payee, cannot tell that it's a lie when it reaches her. If C wants to tattle, he needs to blame B instead of himself to avoid payers assuming that the liquidity deficit is with C rather than B.

Bitcoin Logo

TLDR

Join Our Newsletter

We’ll email you summaries of the latest discussions from authoritative bitcoin sources, like bitcoin-dev, lightning-dev, and Delving Bitcoin.

Explore all Products

ChatBTC imageBitcoin searchBitcoin TranscriptsSaving SatoshiBitcoin Transcripts Review
Built with 🧡 by the Bitcoin Dev Project
View our public visitor count

We'd love to hear your feedback on this project?

Give Feedback