--- Day changed Tue Mar 20 2018 00:12 -!- richard87 [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has quit [Quit: richard87] 00:13 -!- richard87 [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has joined #lnd 00:13 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@67.240.56.42] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 00:17 -!- onryo [~onryo@84.217.167.101] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:17 -!- richard87 [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has quit [Client Quit] 00:17 -!- richard87 [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has joined #lnd 00:24 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 00:26 -!- justcoingo [af9f13ac@gateway/web/freenode/ip.175.159.19.172] has joined #lnd 00:26 < justcoingo> hello there 00:27 < justcoingo> hello anyone here? 00:29 -!- cam [~cam@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 00:32 -!- justcoingo [af9f13ac@gateway/web/freenode/ip.175.159.19.172] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 00:36 -!- cam is now known as treethought 00:53 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: colatkinson] 01:25 -!- treethought [~cam@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [] 01:25 < rabidus> unable to start wallet: dial tcp :0: i/o timeout 01:25 < rabidus> ip is correct rpc server ip addr 01:26 < rabidus> bitcoind is running on different server than lnd 01:29 < stevenroose> rabidus: do you have your RPC port opened in the firewall? 01:30 < rabidus> yep, i can get reply with curl from lnd-server 01:30 -!- meshcollider [uid246294@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wizchbechkexszda] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 01:30 < stevenroose> Does bitcoind listen for RPC on all interfaces? 0.0.0.0:8334 instead of 127.0.0.1:8334 01:30 < stevenroose> ah 01:30 < rabidus> i'm wondering about that port 0, what is that 01:30 < stevenroose> did you mention the port in the lnd config explicitly? 01:30 < stevenroose> yeah I saw that 01:30 < rabidus> yep 01:30 < rabidus> 8332 01:31 < stevenroose> 8332? Is that the default Core rpc port? Thought it was 8334 as well 01:31 -!- meshcollider [uid246294@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qbftjitekgmyqlmb] has joined #lnd 01:31 < rabidus> oh dang, zmq is missing port 01:33 -!- Pioklo_ [~Pioklo@5.83.71.43] has joined #lnd 01:38 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] halseth pushed 5 new commits to master: https://git.io/vxZOR 01:38 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 95997b9 Wilmer Paulino: lnrpc: add flags to specify retrieving different channels 01:38 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 85b0378 Wilmer Paulino: rpcserver: determine which channels to return based on passed params 01:38 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 7642bad Wilmer Paulino: cmd/lncli: add flags to listchannels to retrieve specific channels 01:42 < rabidus> hmm, still.. 01:42 -!- dionysus69 [~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/dionysus69] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 01:43 < rabidus> unable to start wallet: dial tcp :29000: i/o timeout 02:13 -!- richard87_ [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has joined #lnd 02:16 -!- friyin [~kvirc@2001:470:ce10:10::711] has joined #lnd 02:16 -!- richard87 [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 02:16 -!- richard87_ is now known as richard87 02:19 -!- friyin [~kvirc@2001:470:ce10:10::711] has quit [Client Quit] 02:19 -!- FreeMind [~kvirc@2001:470:ce10:10::711] has joined #lnd 02:20 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:20 -!- FreeMind is now known as friyin 02:20 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 02:21 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 02:21 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 02:22 -!- ajph [~ajph@unaffiliated/ajph] has joined #lnd 02:29 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:30 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 02:37 -!- sovjet [~sovjet@193.189.166.102] has joined #lnd 02:37 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:38 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 02:57 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@gateway/tor-sasl/lnostdal] has joined #lnd 03:00 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:10 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 03:29 -!- Pioklo_ [~Pioklo@5.83.71.43] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 03:35 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 03:37 -!- creslin [~textual@46.164.128.194] has joined #lnd 03:39 -!- larafale [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #lnd 03:42 -!- creslin [~textual@46.164.128.194] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 03:54 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: colatkinson] 03:56 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 03:58 < rabidus> [lncli] unable to generate seed: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service lnrpc.WalletUnlocker 03:59 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #lnd 04:01 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #lnd 04:20 -!- wxss [~user@109.163.234.141] has joined #lnd 04:22 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 04:32 -!- sovjet [~sovjet@193.189.166.102] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 04:39 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has joined #lnd 04:41 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 04:45 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 04:51 -!- argonath [b18464fd@gateway/web/freenode/ip.177.132.100.253] has joined #lnd 04:54 < argonath> how much the 'autopilot' pays in fees (on-chain) when opening channels? how can i check that or set up a limit? 04:56 -!- larafale [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:57 -!- larafale [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #lnd 04:57 -!- larafale [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:59 -!- StrikeSide [bcc367a4@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.195.103.164] has joined #lnd 04:59 < StrikeSide> Hi everyone :) 05:00 < StrikeSide> I have a quick questions regarding the installation process of my lightning node 05:00 < StrikeSide> I have installed go 1.10 but I don't seem to have the go command available in my binaries. If I try to run it it just says "no such file or directory" 05:00 < StrikeSide> Is anyone able to help me? 05:02 -!- dionysus69 [~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/dionysus69] has joined #lnd 05:50 -!- creslin [~textual@77.120.243.140] has joined #lnd 05:53 <@mlz> StrikeSide, did you set path for it? 05:55 -!- creslin [~textual@77.120.243.140] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 05:57 < StrikeSide> yes I got it to work now 05:57 < StrikeSide> seems strange to me though since I had to set it to /usr/lib/go-1.10/bin/ 05:57 < StrikeSide> The tutorial didn't talk about that 06:00 -!- friyin [~kvirc@2001:470:ce10:10::711] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 06:05 <@mlz> which tutorial? 06:06 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 06:11 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 06:12 <@mlz> StrikeSide, you can install go in a different location 06:12 <@mlz> mine is in /usr/local/go/bin/go 06:13 < StrikeSide> the tutorial on how to install lnd on the lnd github page 06:13 < StrikeSide> https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/INSTALL.md 06:16 -!- camulos [~user@125.161.128.57] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 06:19 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has joined #lnd 06:19 -!- argonath [b18464fd@gateway/web/freenode/ip.177.132.100.253] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 06:20 <@mlz> It's just a generic guide, I use this guide: https://golang.org/doc/install#install 06:36 -!- dionysus69 [~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/dionysus69] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 06:39 -!- larafale [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #lnd 06:51 -!- StrikeSide [bcc367a4@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.195.103.164] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 06:56 < NoImNotNineVolt> lncli doesn't seem to expose an interface to determine the estimated fee to open a given channel. is that accurate? 07:01 -!- quitobro [quitobro@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/quitobro] has joined #lnd 07:02 < rabidus> why "lncli create" gives "[lncli] unable to generate seed: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service lnrpc.WalletUnlocker 07:02 < rabidus> after "Generating fresh cipher seed..." 07:19 <@mlz> rabidus, did you put in a password? 07:19 < rabidus> it doesn't matter 07:20 <@mlz> put in a password first 07:20 < rabidus> same output if I put, or if I don't 07:27 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:28 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #lnd 07:28 -!- rls [~rls@67.215.10.250] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 07:31 < Veggen> anyone able to withdraw from mainnet.yalls.org today? 07:32 < Veggen> (don't everyone go and withdraw large amounts) 07:33 < Veggen> it failed for me, just wondered if anyone else had done it successfully. ut currently, it registers as if I had withdrawn, so if you try it, you'll add to aleexbosworth cleaning up job :) 07:41 -!- maurris [~maurris@unaffiliated/maurris] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:42 -!- qxt [~qxt@unaffiliated/qxt] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 07:44 -!- qxt [~qxt@s91904421.blix.com] has joined #lnd 07:48 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:50 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has joined #lnd 07:51 -!- onryo [~onryo@c-65a7d954.501702014125-0-757473696b74.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #lnd 07:51 -!- onryo [~onryo@c-65a7d954.501702014125-0-757473696b74.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has quit [Changing host] 07:51 -!- onryo [~onryo@unaffiliated/onryo] has joined #lnd 08:01 -!- rls [~rls@74.120.222.234] has joined #lnd 08:01 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 08:05 < Veggen> 1Is there a list of mainnet services, so far? 08:06 < Veggen> Someone asked if I had done multihop payments, but apart from blockstream, I can't find anything more than one intermediate hop away :) 08:10 < Veggen> alternatively, someone in the vicinity of blockstream for example (networkwise) can give me an invoice of 100 satoshi? 08:11 -!- botka [~nodebot@static.171.39.76.144.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:12 -!- botka [~nodebot@static.171.39.76.144.clients.your-server.de] has joined #lnd 08:14 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@104.137.194.255] has joined #lnd 08:14 -!- wxss [~user@109.163.234.141] has quit [Ping timeout: 263 seconds] 08:16 <@mlz> Veggen, i think blockstream is trying to update their node? i'm waiting to hear if their node is stable then i might try to connect to them 08:17 < Veggen> sure. I was just in need of someone a bit far away from me, and looking at the explorer, around blockstream would be good :) 08:25 <@mlz> i'm not sure even if we can route thru a node that has a channel with blockstream we still can pay an invoice from them? 08:27 < Veggen> ok. Someone connected to old.rompert.com and not lnd.rompert.com, then :) 08:27 <@mlz> :D 08:27 < Veggen> hmm. torguard. 08:39 -!- justin___ [~justin@69.70.42.242] has joined #lnd 08:52 -!- meshcollider [uid246294@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qbftjitekgmyqlmb] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity] 09:09 -!- rls [~rls@74.120.222.234] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:23 < rompert> Veggen: here is one list, provided as-is :) https://www.robtex.com/directory/lightning/store/ 09:35 -!- justin___ [~justin@69.70.42.242] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:37 -!- CryptoCowboy [ae2d7880@gateway/web/freenode/ip.174.45.120.128] has joined #lnd 09:38 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 09:38 -!- CryptoCowboy [ae2d7880@gateway/web/freenode/ip.174.45.120.128] has quit [Client Quit] 09:38 -!- naribia [adefe8b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.173.239.232.177] has joined #lnd 09:39 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has joined #lnd 09:46 -!- Pioklo_ [~Pioklo@5.83.71.43] has joined #lnd 09:51 -!- rls [~rls@74.120.222.234] has joined #lnd 09:57 < k1234> Question #1: Is there a way to see the payments that my node has helped route? Question #2: Is there a way to see the payments that have been paid to my node for routing payments? 09:57 < k1234> Question #3: Why does my channel balance (lncli channelbalance) fluctuate up / down a few bits every time I check it? 09:59 < k1234> RE: Question #3: Does lncli channelbalance only include the value of ACTIVE channels? That would explain it, as several of my channels seem to be with nodes that are inconsistent at best... 10:00 -!- jchia_1 [~jchia@116.192.18.160] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 10:05 <@mlz> what do you mean, k1234 ? how do you see those nodes as "inconsistent"? 10:06 <@mlz> inconsistent in which way? 10:14 -!- rls [~rls@74.120.222.234] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:24 < Veggen> never seen channelbalance fluctuate. 10:25 < Veggen> #1: lncli fwdinghistory 10:25 < Veggen> don't get your hopes up :) I have none, after 3 days. 10:39 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 10:43 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has joined #lnd 10:49 <@mlz> k1234, "channelbalance" is your balance in channels, check your data 10:55 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:56 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@136.0.5.32] has joined #lnd 10:56 -!- dionysus69 [~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/dionysus69] has joined #lnd 10:58 -!- CubicEar_ [~cubiceart@c-73-181-185-197.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 11:01 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@136.0.5.32] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 11:07 -!- Styil [Styil@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/styil] has joined #lnd 11:09 < k1234> mlz: inconsistent in that sometimes my channel to them has an "active" status (lncli listchannels) as "false" 11:10 < k1234> Veggen: I also have 0 after 2 days... was hoping I was missing a command! Oh well. early days! 11:10 -!- Styil [Styil@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/styil] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:11 < k1234> mlz: to clarify: sometimes channel is active, sometimes inactive. I'm wondering if that's what "available" means in the description: lncli channelbalance --help 11:11 < k1234> but I'm not sure. 11:15 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:16 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has joined #lnd 11:24 -!- drexl [~drexl@cpc130676-camd16-2-0-cust445.know.cable.virginm.net] has joined #lnd 11:26 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] vapopov opened pull request #898: Wrong BOLT11 prefix in regtest (master...hrprefix) https://git.io/vxnuE 11:32 < k1234> ok: trying to close channel(s) that are active='false' for 2 days. But when I do so, I get an error that the channel cannot be found. Should I use --force? 11:32 -!- cam [~cam@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 11:35 < lndbot> yes, the error message is kind of misleading - just means it couldn't do a cooperative close 11:35 < Veggen> k1234: you need force, yes. Is this channels you created? 11:35 < k1234> thx. 11:36 < Veggen> I think it's not good practise to force-close other peoples channels too soon. 11:36 < k1234> Veggen: channels created for me by autopilot. before I learned to choose / create them myself! 11:36 < Veggen> eh, those others funded. 11:36 < Veggen> ah! ok :) 11:36 < Veggen> might leave them, hope that you spot the node online some time. 11:36 < k1234> I've learned so much in 24 hours! 11:36 < Veggen> k1234: Imagine you'd played with LN on testnet since a month back? 11:37 < lndbot> yeah closing channels people open to you reduces your connectivity and hurts you more than helps. also hurts the network in a minor way 11:37 < Veggen> There's a reason everyone recommended trying testnet first :) 11:37 < k1234> *sigh* if only... but, the best time to plant a tree... 11:37 < Veggen> yah. 11:37 < Veggen> I still recommend others to start at testnet. 11:37 < Veggen> And I am sure that after 24 hours, you somewhat agree? 11:38 <@mlz> haha 11:38 <@mlz> don't use autopilot on mainnet, try it on testnet instead :D 11:38 < Veggen> I do hope we eventually get there that autopilot is usable on mainnet, though. 11:39 <@mlz> autopilot still needs to be improved and unless it's an AI, i wouldn't use :D 11:39 < k1234> Veggen: what's your pubkey again? 11:39 <@mlz> i prefer to be in control of my own destiny.. i mean destinations of my channel funds :D 11:39 < Veggen> 02b7060f74b7e04d3d8af97fab20381fcc16f7a33c7e526fa5c9b96afdb288d7d2 11:39 < k1234> confirmed. 11:40 <@mlz> woot k1234 is opening a channel to my node :D 11:40 < k1234> how do you feel about multiple channels between nodes? And in general, what is best practice in this regard? 11:40 < k1234> mlz: confirmed! 11:40 < Veggen> mlz: yah, for now. But a limited number of "help the network" channels, I could probably afford. 11:40 -!- Styil [Styil@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/styil] has joined #lnd 11:40 < Veggen> k1213: don't see the use for that. 11:40 <@mlz> k1234, multiple channels between nodes are ok but.. 11:41 < Veggen> it does in fact fill up routing tables, and I don't think it does any good. 11:42 < k1234> ok. I just assumed that there was a positive reason, for the capacity to do it to be built into lnd 11:42 < k1234> my reason was to increase channel capacity. 11:43 < Veggen> k1234: there's nothing theoretically impossible against adding funds to a channel. but it's not implemented yet. 11:43 < Veggen> In this case, I guess a second channel is ok. 11:43 < k1234> ok. gotta run. will make 2nd channel to you soon. thx! 11:44 -!- Styil [Styil@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/styil] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:44 < Veggen> I'd consider just close the first one. 11:45 < Veggen> but if you want, we can use it to balance channel capacities before we do that. 11:47 -!- larafale [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 11:48 -!- larafale [~larafale@i15-les02-ntr-176-181-166-60.sfr.lns.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #lnd 11:53 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 11:53 -!- offerm [546f8b93@gateway/web/freenode/ip.84.111.139.147] has joined #lnd 11:54 -!- gethh [uid264798@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-axmhhzbrpktrjdtp] has joined #lnd 11:57 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has joined #lnd 12:10 -!- deusexbeer [~deusexbee@095-129-170-005-dynamic-pool-adsl.wbt.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 12:20 -!- cam [~cam@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [] 12:40 -!- deusexbeer [~deusexbee@093-092-180-136-dynamic-pool-adsl.wbt.ru] has joined #lnd 12:40 -!- onryo [~onryo@unaffiliated/onryo] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:43 -!- onryo [~onryo@c-65a7d954.501702014125-0-757473696b74.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #lnd 12:47 <@roasbeef> k1234: lnd supports multiple channels between nodes 12:47 <@roasbeef> can be useful if you want to isolate usage of one channel, or advertise one or not the other, etc 12:49 -!- pioklo [~Pioklo@5.83.71.43] has joined #lnd 12:51 -!- Pioklo_ [~Pioklo@5.83.71.43] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 12:53 -!- DrOlmer [~DrOlmer@unaffiliated/drolmer] has joined #lnd 13:11 < lndbot> has the idea been discussed at all to only allow Tor connectivity between LN nodes? Like require it in the RFC? 13:12 <@roasbeef> well tor only would just be hidden servies 13:12 <@roasbeef> servies 13:12 <@roasbeef> there's a PR for that, but isn't yet finished, might pick it up soon myself, but many other things to do :p 13:17 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/saleemrashid] has joined #lnd 13:19 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@esker-237.dynamic.rpi.edu] has joined #lnd 13:20 < lndbot> I think anonymized traffic should be the only supported configuration for the first release, IMO. It doesn't mean you can't associate nodes with IPs and then by extension people but it makes it harder to do it. And Tor traffic in its default mode is pretty identifiable by network operators but it requires a position of privilege in the stream. 13:21 < stiell> Tor isn't completely decentralised, as it relies on a centrally managed list of directory authorities. So I'm not sure it would be good to require the whole network to be Tor only. 13:23 < lndbot> yeah, I'm aware of some of the serious shortcomings Tor has, and that's why I used "anonymized traffic" rather than Tor specifically. I think Tor is probably the best option for its specific use case right now, but it's by no means ideal. If privacy isn't built into the base layer, it can't be bolted on later, and the Internet was not built with privacy in mind. 13:23 < stiell> Though I'd like to see node software connecting via Tor by default and automatically setting up and advertising onion addresses. 13:24 < lndbot> yes, and an opt-in function that lets you still operate over normal IP traffic if you wish, especially for companies operating LN nodes so they can offer the best compatibility 13:27 < lndbot> it will definitely confuse people just learning about Lightning via the RFCs if it uses onion routing with payments but also something like Tor for actual traffic. 13:29 < lndbot> one nice secondary benefit of Lightning on Tor is it incentivizes improving the Tor network as well -- I imagine it could be very easy to code a simple app to let people make Lightning payments to donate for the operation of Tor nodes 13:31 < lndbot> stiell, there’s a PR for that https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/pull/796, lnd already supports outbound tor configuration 13:32 -!- larafale [~larafale@i15-les02-ntr-176-181-166-60.sfr.lns.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:33 -!- larafale [~larafale@i15-les02-ntr-176-181-166-60.sfr.lns.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #lnd 13:45 -!- TerminusAlamond4 [~TerminusA@sj0.logicfailed.com] has joined #lnd 13:47 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@esker-237.dynamic.rpi.edu] has quit [Quit: colatkinson] 13:50 -!- larafale [~larafale@i15-les02-ntr-176-181-166-60.sfr.lns.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:50 -!- larafale [~larafale@i15-les02-ntr-176-181-166-60.sfr.lns.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #lnd 13:51 -!- larafale_ [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #lnd 13:51 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 13:52 -!- cam [~cam@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 13:53 -!- cam is now known as treethought 13:55 -!- larafale [~larafale@i15-les02-ntr-176-181-166-60.sfr.lns.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 14:01 -!- dionysus69 [~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/dionysus69] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 14:01 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has joined #lnd 14:02 -!- MaxSan [~user@91.207.102.163] has joined #lnd 14:16 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/saleemrashid] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.0.1] 14:20 -!- treethought [~cam@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:22 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 14:31 -!- meshcollider [uid246294@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-yqfzmbkdrfrrgwlm] has joined #lnd 14:32 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:38 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 14:51 < Veggen> yay! 14:52 < Veggen> I have forwarded *one* transaction! 14:53 < Veggen> pretty large one too, 121972 satoshis. 14:54 < Veggen> "pretty large". 14:56 < Veggen> was only room for one transaction of that size in that direction, tho. 15:14 -!- spinza [~spin@196.212.164.26] has quit [Quit: Coyote finally caught up with me...] 15:24 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@104.137.194.255] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 15:37 -!- larafale_ [~larafale@ax213-1-82-66-157-194.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:38 -!- spinza [~spin@196.212.164.26] has joined #lnd 15:41 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:43 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 15:45 -!- naribia [adefe8b1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.173.239.232.177] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 15:48 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 15:51 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 15:52 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 15:54 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef closed pull request #894: peer: ensure we stop the channel if error happens in loadActiveChannels (master...peer-stop-channel) https://git.io/vxGNd 15:55 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef pushed 2 new commits to master: https://git.io/vxnhV 15:55 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 9516d8d Steven Roose: rpc: Fix typo in OpenChannelRequest 15:55 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 6d07b86 Olaoluwa Osuntokun: Merge pull request #847 from stevenroose/typo-funding... 15:56 -!- pioklo [~Pioklo@5.83.71.43] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 15:56 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 15:57 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef closed pull request #864: [Feature] Add TLSExtraDomain to config (master...addtlsdomain) https://git.io/vxYFF 15:57 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 16:01 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 16:06 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 16:10 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 16:14 -!- Linrono [6c1f9344@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.31.147.68] has joined #lnd 16:14 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:19 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 16:23 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 16:23 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:28 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 16:33 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 16:37 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 16:41 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 16:46 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 16:50 -!- maurris [~maurris@unaffiliated/maurris] has joined #lnd 16:50 -!- akihabara [~psyco@206.ip-51-254-38.eu] has quit [] 16:51 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 16:51 < qxt> Who are these shits attacking the LN? https://twitter.com/KevinKelbie/status/976161613052108802 16:52 -!- Akihabara [Akihabara@static.163.101.201.195.clients.your-server.de] has joined #lnd 16:52 <@roasbeef> hardly an attack really 16:53 <@roasbeef> easily defended against with basic iptables usage 16:53 < qxt> yeah that would work ofc for now 16:55 < qxt> using fees to limit this does not sound like a super good idea imho. Maybe a proof of work ? 16:55 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 16:56 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef opened pull request #904: rpc+lnd: add new invoice-only macaroon (master...invoice-macaroon) https://git.io/vxcJF 16:59 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 17:04 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 17:05 -!- qxt [~qxt@s91904421.blix.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 17:07 -!- jchia_1 [~jchia@116.192.18.160] has joined #lnd 17:09 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 17:10 < lndbot> imo, having built in node banning functionality would be good, since all communications have to be authenticated anyway. new nodes are untrusted, long-connected nodes and nodes with channels and balances are trusted a little more. force the attacker to generate new keys to get around the bans, though I can immediately see a scenario where inflating the list of banned nodes could be another attack vector 17:11 -!- drexl [~drexl@cpc130676-camd16-2-0-cust445.know.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: drexl] 17:12 < lndbot> pubkey+IP banning seem like a simple place to start 17:12 <@roasbeef> yep, the connmgr already has a concept of decaying scores 17:12 <@roasbeef> so next steps would be to decide what actions in crease the score, and then what threshold constituies a ban 17:12 <@roasbeef> then write down a set of banned nodes to disk, withi nplicies w.r.t if the ban should be persistent or not 17:13 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 17:15 < lndbot> IIRC bitcoin core is very forgiving but remembers everything - you can do some bad stuff and it' 17:15 < lndbot> ll let you get away with it but eventually you'll be locked out for got 17:15 < lndbot> ood* 17:15 < lndbot> sorry my keyboard is a live ferret 17:16 <@roasbeef> yep that's the idea here 17:16 <@roasbeef> tho we might be a bit more aggressive 17:16 <@roasbeef> as our connections are a bit more precious in a sense 17:16 <@roasbeef> one allowance would be to say: we only allow N connections to be established that don't create a channel within time T 17:17 < lndbot> yeah, I'd say temp bans that are logarithmic in time after each successive naughty behavior: initially like 2^1 seconds, then 2^2, then 2^3 17:17 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 17:18 < lndbot> and then different behavior elicits different responses 17:19 < lndbot> s/logarithmic/exponential 17:20 < lndbot> I do like the idea of making connections cost something, either in memory or CPU resources 17:21 <@roasbeef> well they do 17:21 <@roasbeef> you need to commit funds 17:21 < lndbot> just for connecting to nodes via TCP? 17:21 <@roasbeef> we could even rachet up the amount as we have more incoming conns outside of some whitelist 17:21 <@roasbeef> possibly 17:21 <@roasbeef> yeh the decaying bands are like that 17:22 <@roasbeef> is say this as there isn't much use to creating a connection to another node w/o making a channel beyond listening for network messages 17:22 < lndbot> I think it'd be good for nodes to be able to connect but not have to open up channels, but there's a sliding scale of trust - a simple authenticated connection is untrusted and the first to get disconnected,ratelimited and banned 17:22 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 17:24 < lndbot> a node that we have a channel open to with no funds on their side is trusted a little bit more, a node with funds on their side is trusted even more, channels that have deviated x % in our favor since their on-chain opening get us to trust the nodes we connect to even more, just as far as allowing/prioritizing connections and possibly channel update msgs 17:26 < lndbot> but naked nodes need to connect to someone to get an initial view of the network, and some time will necessarily pass between them doing that and selecting a node to open a channel to. of course they can just connect to some store's node but that behavior operates outside of the network itself - it'd be good if nodes could just join the network, open some random channels and get to spending and routing. 17:27 <@roasbeef> yeh so we'd give them a pass to a degree 17:27 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 17:27 <@roasbeef> like 5 mins after conn, but no channel or soemthing like that 17:27 <@roasbeef> as at that point, they should already have the info to bootstrap themselves to the rest of the network 17:27 <@roasbeef> but there'd maybe be some "freebie" allotment 17:27 < lndbot> yep, and just kick them off not ban them unless they keep doing it 17:28 <@roasbeef> yeh 17:28 < lndbot> I think banning malicious pubkeys might be a pretty good approach 17:28 < lndbot> generating privkeys is not very intensive but after banning x pubkeys from one IP you can just ban the IP altogether 17:29 <@roasbeef> would likely do both 17:31 < lndbot> other alternatives with varying degrees of sanity include challenge-response where you ask them to sign messages to stay connected, proof of work from a problem you provide, a network "memory" where nodes gossip about other nodes' trustworthiness, uptime and other metrics .... 17:31 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 17:32 <@roasbeef> #craefulgang 17:33 < lndbot> tbh I think the network "memory" would also be useful from a routing perspective as well - that way you can get a sense of reliability of individual nodes so if a user decides to choose "take most reliable route" it might pay more in fees, but it'll be to nodes that have been on the network for the longest, had the best reachability and so forth 17:35 < lndbot> could even tie it in somehow with the anti-ddos measures 17:35 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 17:35 < lndbot> gonna read up a bit on what Core does https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Denial_of_Service_.28DoS.29_attacks 17:36 < lndbot> dang this doc was as of 0.7.0, pretty old 17:38 < Linrono> i feel like a lot on that wiki is pretty outdated 17:39 <@roasbeef> yeh 17:40 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] adrienemery opened pull request #906: Update python grpc docs to have macaroon example, update syntax to python 3 (master...python-docs) https://git.io/vxckA 17:40 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 17:43 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 17:44 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 17:45 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 17:49 < Akihabara> i think its time to upgrade my node to mainnet 17:49 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 17:49 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 17:50 < lndbot> #craefulgang 17:50 < lndbot> I will say my node has been attacked tho 17:50 < lndbot> I was wondering why the load was so high 17:51 < Linrono> if i deleted my graph folder, have i lost control over my channel? 17:53 < lndbot> yeah, I believe so 17:53 < Linrono> oh, that sucks 17:54 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 17:54 < lndbot> yeah, you wanna make backups pretty often 17:54 < Linrono> gotcha 17:54 < lndbot> future state, everything will be deterministic so if you recover from a seed you can even resume where your channels were, but we're not there yet 17:55 < lndbot> the seed recovery added in 0.4 is amazing though, it's awesome not to have to worry as much about losing or corrupting binary blobs of keys and stuff 17:57 < Linrono> yeah seed backups are pretty sweet 17:58 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 18:02 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 18:07 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 18:11 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 18:12 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 18:13 < ChunkyPuffs> Is the statement "smart contracts do not work on the base chain" too much? I feel it's true. 18:14 < ChunkyPuffs> It seems to me there is no benefit to having it there if it can be accomplished on a second layer, is this short-sighted? 18:15 < lndbot> it depends on the crypto's value proposition and goals 18:15 < lndbot> for Bitcoin, the value proposition is to provide the simplest, hardened building blocks and allow for them to be the base layer for other stuff 18:16 < lndbot> personally, I don't think Bitcoin should be Turing complete--it doesn't need to be to achieve its value proposition 18:16 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 18:17 < lndbot> so from the perspective of smart contracts, they sit in the middle of simple signature checks and full-on state machines and stuff 18:19 < lndbot> I think they should be part of the base layer only if they don't threaten the fundamental value proposition and if they don't provide additional surface area, code-wise operationally or otherwise with which to attack Bitcoin 18:20 < ChunkyPuffs> Well, no, my point is that turing completeness can be accomplished on layers. 18:20 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 18:20 < ChunkyPuffs> And I really don't see any value, objectively, at all in having it on the base layer. 18:21 < ChunkyPuffs> Am I wrong in assuming the ONLY quality this provides is an enlarged attack surface? 18:21 < lndbot> the value is that the entire network enforces the rules rather than a group of opt-in participants 18:21 < ChunkyPuffs> If people decide to move their funds to a turing complete 3rd layer, they can participate in an ecosystem just as rich as ETh 18:23 < ChunkyPuffs> Technically Lightning isn't bitcoin anymore. It's lightning tokens. But the lightning tokens are backed by real bitcoin, it's like cash was once a silver token, it is no less enforcement of rules. 18:23 < ChunkyPuffs> I don't get how a turing complete layer wouldn't be equivalent to a virtual network enforcing rules. 18:24 < ChunkyPuffs> And how it's not identical to something like ETH, I don't see how it has a benefit compared to such an idea. 18:24 -!- vbczstrh [893bfce7@gateway/web/freenode/ip.137.59.252.231] has joined #lnd 18:24 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:26 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 18:28 -!- creslin [~textual@deposing-waterfront.volia.net] has joined #lnd 18:30 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 18:33 -!- vbczstrh [893bfce7@gateway/web/freenode/ip.137.59.252.231] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 18:33 < lndbot> thats inaccurate. Lightning is unbroadcasted bitcoin transactions. there is no new token. 18:35 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has joined #lnd 18:37 <@mlz> ChunkyPuffs, the money spent on LN is bitcoin, stop the dumb fud 18:37 < ChunkyPuffs> This isn't fud. 18:38 < ChunkyPuffs> It's a promise token, you misread what I said, fundamentally. 18:38 <@mlz> and this isn't the channel for your blablabling 18:38 < ChunkyPuffs> Lightning changes what merchants are accepting, nobody is going to cash out their multisig contract, the funds now exist on lightning, backed up by promise of the base chain. 18:38 < ChunkyPuffs> Lightning is cash, bitcoin is bitcoin. 18:39 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@38.109.179.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:39 < ChunkyPuffs> What the currency is, when on a lightning contract is essentially like how a USD was once a silver token, I'm not saying it's not Bitcoin. 18:40 < ChunkyPuffs> I'm saying that this is decentralized banking for bitcoin, you can take your lightning contract and withdraw it on the base chain any time you want, just like how you could withdraw silver metal for your USD at one point, how is this fud, and how is this inaccurate? 18:40 < ChunkyPuffs> TL;DR the money spent on LN is promise-of-bitcoin. 18:45 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:46 -!- melvster [~melvin@ip-86-49-18-198.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:46 -!- tm604 [~tom@pdpc/supporter/professional/tm604] has joined #lnd 18:52 < Linrono> is there a way to list ln wallet's used public addresses? 19:02 <@roasbeef> Linrono: we keep track of it, but it isn't yet exposed on the RPC interface 19:02 < NoImNotNineVolt> so it seems the local_balance on one of my testnet channels may have decreased, but there hasn't been any activity... 19:02 <@roasbeef> if you funded the cahnnel, and update the fee that can happen 19:02 <@roasbeef> look at the number of updates on your channel 19:03 < NoImNotNineVolt> wait, two of my channels. num_updates is 7 on one but 0 on another. 19:03 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 19:04 < Linrono> roasbeef, i can figureout the utxo's i think, i just was hoping for a way to do it easily. thanks for the info 19:04 < NoImNotNineVolt> http://dpaste.com/0NRX9HZ 19:05 < NoImNotNineVolt> ah, was that just a super high fee on the main chain to open? 19:06 < NoImNotNineVolt> sorry, s/main chain/l1/ 19:06 < NoImNotNineVolt> err, L1, for clarity :P 19:06 <@roasbeef> hmm yeh the fee was pretty high for that 19:06 <@roasbeef> testnet fees can be wonky at times 19:07 < NoImNotNineVolt> ah, which brings me to a question i had.. 19:07 < NoImNotNineVolt> there's no way (on the user end) to get at the fee estimate before opening a channel? 19:07 < NoImNotNineVolt> e.g. a --nocreate opt or something 19:07 <@roasbeef> it's possible, but not exposed atm 19:07 <@roasbeef> we've discussed that, basically make everythign two stage 19:07 <@roasbeef> present fees, then ack 19:07 <@roasbeef> tho you _can_ set the fee for the funding transacton as well 19:07 < NoImNotNineVolt> ah, even better. 19:08 <@roasbeef> stevenroose had suggested allowing to set for teh commitment as well, setting a lower bound for it 19:08 < NoImNotNineVolt> well, i'm lazy, so not "better", since now that offloads the fee estimation logic to the user :P 19:08 < NoImNotNineVolt> but i'll take it ;) 19:09 < NoImNotNineVolt> thanks for the awesome work though. 19:11 <@mlz> lncli openchannel 023456xx 1200000 2000 --sat_per_byte=1 19:13 <@mlz> i opened a channel with veggen and forgot to set the fee but the tx had only 3 sat/byte, i guess it was bitcoind's fee estimation 19:38 -!- MaxSan [~user@91.207.102.163] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:46 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 19:52 <@roasbeef> 2018-03-21 02:51:38.339 [INF] CRTR: Pruning 6382 Zombie Channels 19:53 <@roasbeef> Walking Dead over here 19:53 -!- camulos [~user@125.161.128.57] has joined #lnd 19:55 < k1234> roasbeef: would you clarify something regarding --push_amt (I have read http://dev.lightning.community/overview/ and don't understand). Is the liquidity available in a channel dependent upon this amount? If so, how? Or, is it dependent upon --local_amt? 19:56 < k1234> IE: if I do lncli openchannel --local_amt=100000 and --push_amt=50000, is 100000 or 50000 available as liquidity to route payments through (mins on chain tx fees) 19:58 <@roasbeef> you're sending the other person money at the same time you open the channel 19:59 < k1234> Yes. I understand this. Does it affect liquidity available for routing payments within the channel? 20:01 < k1234> put differently: (how) does --push_amt affect the liquidity within the channel? 20:02 <@roasbeef> it re-distributes it 20:02 <@roasbeef> if you don't have a push amount, then people can route thru that channel via anothe channrl 20:02 <@roasbeef> if you do, then people can route _into_ that channel out via another channel 20:02 <@roasbeef> your channels may even just become passively rebalanced due to the payment flows of others 20:03 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has joined #lnd 20:04 < k1234> ok. thanks. 20:08 -!- Styil [Styil@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/styil] has joined #lnd 20:15 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 20:15 -!- fiatjaf [~fiatjaf@162.243.220.95] has quit [Quit: ~] 20:20 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 20:28 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 20:28 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #lnd 20:36 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 20:43 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 20:49 -!- Linrono [6c1f9344@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.31.147.68] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 21:00 -!- ChunkyPuffs [~ChunkyPuf@gateway/tor-sasl/chunkypuffs] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 21:00 -!- ChunkyPuffs [~ChunkyPuf@gateway/tor-sasl/chunkypuffs] has joined #lnd 21:08 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: colatkinson] 21:09 -!- getdembits [6364ddb3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.99.100.221.179] has joined #lnd 21:10 < getdembits> just trying to figure out why my node isn't advertising my alias and ip info? 21:10 < getdembits> this is on a windows 10 machine 21:11 < getdembits> and my firewall has the correct port set 9735 21:11 <@mlz> if your node on windows gets ddosed, how do you handle it? 21:12 < getdembits> I'm assuming the location where I should place the sample-lnd.conf file is %localappdata%\Lnd\data 21:13 < getdembits> shutdown the port 21:17 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 21:21 -!- getdembits [6364ddb3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.99.100.221.179] has left #lnd [] 21:41 -!- quitobro [quitobro@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/quitobro] has quit [Quit: quitobro] 21:45 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 22:07 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:07 -!- Giszmo1 [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has joined #lnd 22:35 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 22:57 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 22:57 -!- naribia [2fbd49aa@gateway/web/freenode/ip.47.189.73.170] has joined #lnd 22:59 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:59 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #lnd 23:03 < Veggen> hrm. Can't seem to send off all the tBTC from my old eclair.. 23:03 < Veggen> (mobile wallet) 23:10 < Veggen> oh, got it. Needed to paste an address, can't type. 23:28 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: colatkinson] 23:28 -!- offerm [546f8b93@gateway/web/freenode/ip.84.111.139.147] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 23:47 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd