--- Day changed Wed Jul 29 2015 00:25 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 00:54 -!- bedeho [~bedeho@195.159.234.190] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 01:29 -!- CoinMuncher [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #lightning-dev 02:51 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev 02:53 -!- jtimon [~quassel@200.Red-79-148-174.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #lightning-dev 02:57 < Guest4710> rusty: Is there a more in-depth paper on your shachain with more details? 03:03 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAF05.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:04 -!- dis__ [~dis@209.197.16.143] has joined #lightning-dev 03:04 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAF05.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #lightning-dev 03:07 -!- AxiomCrypto [~dis@c-71-205-103-195.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 03:20 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 03:37 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev 03:37 < rusty> Guest4710: No, writing one is on my TODO. Meanwhile, there's the code; it's not that complex really. 03:40 < Guest4710> rusty: Yeah, saw the code. Nice to see it commented :) I think I get the gist of it, but I'll wait for your paper before diving any further into the details. Is there any ETA on it? 03:41 < rusty> Guest4710: hmm, design.txt is as close as it gets for now. I'd really like to prove that deriving SHACHAIN(N+1) from SHACHAIN(N)...SHACHAIN(0) requires inverting SHA256. 04:04 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #lightning-dev [] 04:18 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev 04:18 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #lightning-dev [] 04:18 < CodeShark> rusty, I created a new thread on the mailing list a couple hours ago and I still don't see it posted 04:18 < CodeShark> argh, he picked a good time to leave :p 04:19 < CodeShark> are there any mailing list admins in here? 04:23 < Guest4710> Is it the OP_CHECKSPVPROOFVERIFY thread? 04:35 < CodeShark> yer 04:36 < CodeShark> is there something wrong with my email clients? or has it not been forwarded? 04:56 < aj> that post shows up on http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2015-July/thread.html 04:56 < aj> could by your client, your email account, or your subscription to the list might not be re-forwarding your own posts back to you 04:57 < CodeShark> hmmm...is there a way to test this without spamming the list? 04:59 < CodeShark> I do seem to be getting posts I make in existing threads 05:00 < CodeShark> perhaps it is my client - perhaps if someone responds to it it will appear 05:00 < sipa> it may be greylisting that delays the mail for a few minutes 05:42 -!- Janaka-Steph [~Janaka-St@che77-1-82-238-24-26.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #lightning-dev 06:44 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@c-73-142-181-219.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lightning-dev 07:20 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@c-73-142-181-219.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:21 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has joined #lightning-dev 07:21 -!- Janaka-Steph [~Janaka-St@che77-1-82-238-24-26.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com] 07:59 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-dkamhfyudkhnoafu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:05 -!- CoinMuncher [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 09:13 -!- CJP [~CJP@a83-163-77-195.adsl.xs4all.nl] has joined #lightning-dev 09:41 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qoxbwgppibtwlcne] has joined #lightning-dev 10:26 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAF05.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [] 12:26 -!- dis [~dis@209.197.16.137] has joined #lightning-dev 12:27 -!- dis is now known as Guest93867 12:28 -!- dis__ [~dis@209.197.16.143] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 12:43 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:44 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has joined #lightning-dev 12:44 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:44 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has joined #lightning-dev 12:47 -!- StephenM_ [~stephenm3@c-73-142-181-219.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lightning-dev 12:49 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 13:18 -!- StephenM_ [~stephenm3@c-73-142-181-219.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:19 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has joined #lightning-dev 13:24 -!- CJP [~CJP@a83-163-77-195.adsl.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: Ik ga weg] 14:49 -!- maaku [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 14:52 -!- maaku [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #lightning-dev 14:53 -!- maaku is now known as Guest90433 17:48 -!- StephenM_ [~stephenm3@c-73-142-181-219.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lightning-dev 17:51 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 18:17 -!- Guest93867 is now known as axiomcrypto 18:52 -!- StephenM_ is now known as StephenM347 19:17 -!- jtimon [~quassel@200.Red-79-148-174.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 19:35 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev 19:42 < StephenM347> rusty: Can I run an idea by you? 19:42 < rusty> StephenM347: sure! 19:43 < StephenM347> rusty: Great. So, the whole escape transaction thing seems like it's getting pretty complex, even though I recognize it's a big win for getting it out the door faster 19:43 < StephenM347> But I was thinking... 19:43 < rusty> StephenM347: I just threw that out, and went for single-funder. 19:44 < StephenM347> Oh? I didn't know. Did you find a way to do it trust-lessly? 19:46 < StephenM347> I think I just realized why my idea won't work, but I'll say it anyway. I was thinking it would be good to incrementally build the anchor tx, so that the other person can never hold hostage more than the incremental amount 19:47 < rusty> StephenM347: yes, that was the state of play before lightning. The idea to create a network of channels was to transfer in tiny amounts to make sure they got across the network. 19:47 < rusty> StephenM347: Are you subscribed to lightning-dev (linuxfoundation.org)? 19:48 < StephenM347> Yeah, I am, but I have a few days of backlog to catch up on. 19:49 < StephenM347> rusty: Which email chain did you specify that you were going back to single-funder? 19:49 < rusty> Subject: Single-funder anchor model? 19:50 < rusty> StephenM347: it only took a day to code up, it's pretty simple. 19:51 < StephenM347> Nice. I'm reading that btc talk post now 20:00 < StephenM347> Ahh, so it's a one way channel initially, and then an on-blockchain transaction takes place to fairly bring the channel back to a two-way state 20:00 < StephenM347> Only problem is that it's still limited by the funds that one person can contribute 20:00 < rusty> LN can be used to rebalance. 20:01 < rusty> You only need swap-to-blockchain for bootstrap. 20:01 < rusty> Yes, indeed. Though I think LN will be for tiny amounts initially anyway. My feeling is that there's a lot of room at the bottom... 20:01 < StephenM347> But if Alice and Bob want to start a channel with 1 BTC each and they only have 1 BTC each, they can't really do that. They start a channel with 1 btc in, and then level it back to 0.5 each, though 20:02 < StephenM347> But tiny amounts add up, and you want to refresh as infrequently as possible 20:02 < rusty> StephenM347: True, but my mental model is still Joseph's original "connect to 5 random hubs", where this model works fine. 20:03 < StephenM347> rusty: So who would be the one contributing the funds initially, the user or the hub? 20:03 < rusty> StephenM347: yes :) 20:03 < StephenM347> I guess it would have to be the user 20:03 < StephenM347> As having the HUB do it could be a DoS vulnerability 20:03 < rusty> StephenM347: that's in the pile of unanswered questions on fees and routing. 20:03 < rusty> StephenM347: but if a user can't get any hubs to front funds, it can't receive payments. 20:09 < rusty> StephenM347: a hub may end up charging enough to cover costs (ie. tx fees, maybe a sweetner) to atomic swap in funds. Early on we probably wouldnt bother. 20:13 < StephenM347> rusty: Makes sense. Well, I'm glad there's a way to do it trustlessly! 20:15 < rusty> I'm now implementing HTLCs... won't have anything for a week or so I expect. But I'm itching to get to the fun part (routing!). 20:36 < StephenM347> rusty: Is it really that advantageous to use 1 bi-directional channel over 2 uni-directional channels? 2 uni-directional channels can reverse direction indefinitely 20:38 < aj> StephenM347: that only works if the 2 uni-directional channels go at the same rate, otherwise A->B exhausts and reverse directiorn while B->A sits there, and you've got two B->A channels. and if the go at the same rate, a single bi-directional channel works fine too 20:39 < StephenM347> aj: Gotcha, thanks 20:49 < StephenM347> One potential problem with the method described in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1134319 is that Bob has to sign away an output without knowing the pre-image of the txid 20:50 < StephenM347> If Alice sees that Bob received some funds before Bob sees that they received them, Alice could trick Bob into opening a new channel and actually signing away some coins he had just been given 20:51 < StephenM347> So, for that reason, it might be a good idea to wait a random amount of time before signing a refund tx 20:51 < StephenM347> Or you could get a hash midstate and verify the txid outputs without the signatures... but that's messy 20:52 < StephenM347> Actually, signing requires the scriptPubKey, so nevermind! 20:54 -!- Guest90433 [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:55 -!- maaku [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #lightning-dev 20:55 -!- maaku is now known as Guest98795 21:42 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 22:24 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@c-73-142-181-219.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [] 23:52 -!- Janaka-Steph [~Janaka-St@che77-1-82-238-24-26.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #lightning-dev