--- Day changed Mon Apr 09 2018 00:01 -!- vertian [4ba88ba8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.75.168.139.168] has joined #lnd 00:05 <@mlz> yea that's one of them 00:27 -!- pioklo [~Pioklo@ip-91.246.66.118.skyware.pl] has joined #lnd 00:29 < Veggen> Hmmf. I have some unconfirmed balance that I think won't be confirmed before sweeping funds are implemented.... 01:03 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has joined #lnd 01:08 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 01:30 -!- rafalcpp [~racalcppp@84-10-11-234.static.chello.pl] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 02:03 -!- dannym [2e0b7732@gateway/web/freenode/ip.46.11.119.50] has joined #lnd 02:03 < dannym> hello all 02:05 < dannym> I'm trying to set up a LND node on a VPS, by following https://dev.lightning.community/guides/installation/ , are there any minimum requirements specified with respect to hardware specs? 02:07 -!- simlay [~simlay@gateway/tor-sasl/simlay] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 02:20 -!- simlay [~simlay@gateway/tor-sasl/simlay] has joined #lnd 02:56 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@203-179-90-205.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 02:58 -!- pioklo [~Pioklo@ip-91.246.66.118.skyware.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:06 -!- erlingrj [81f1e6d3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.129.241.230.211] has joined #lnd 03:06 -!- erlingrj [81f1e6d3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.129.241.230.211] has quit [Client Quit] 03:12 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@p595125-ipngn13401marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp] has joined #lnd 03:14 -!- lnostdal_ [~lnostdal@77.70.119.51] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 03:30 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has joined #lnd 03:35 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 03:58 < Veggen> dannym: Wouldn't run it on less than 2 GB RAM, I think. 04:01 -!- belcher_ [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #lnd 04:01 < dannym> about how much HDD space would I need? 04:07 -!- tiagotrs [~user@p5DC473B4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #lnd 04:07 -!- tiagotrs [~user@p5DC473B4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Changing host] 04:07 -!- tiagotrs [~user@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has joined #lnd 04:11 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@xdsl-188-155-63-9.adslplus.ch] has joined #lnd 04:14 < Veggen> prod or test? 04:16 < Veggen> I'd say at least 250GB for prod, for test I guess you could get by with 50 GB. 04:16 < dannym> I was going to follow this guide https://dev.lightning.community/guides/installation/ , I think prod right? 04:16 < Veggen> that one covers test. 04:17 < dannym> what can I follow for prod then please? 04:19 < zyp> if you need a guide, you should probably start with testnet 04:19 < Veggen> I'd still recommend doing it in test first, yes. 04:20 < Veggen> there's a couple of different arguments, port numbers etc. differ a bit, but else the guide is really the same. 04:21 < dannym> yeah ok I guess I can start with test net first 04:21 < dannym> and if prod is run, are payouts paid or something like that? 04:22 < zyp> if you're in it to earn money, you're doing it wrong 04:23 < dannym> I'm not, I'm just asking 04:24 < Veggen> dannym: there's not much fees to be had. I have run aprod node since one month back, and have...30 satoshi in fees. 04:24 < zyp> well, you'd be able to collect fees on payments you route 04:24 < Veggen> 3 of them were my own testing Eclair :) 04:25 < dannym> understood 04:25 < zyp> but the thing is, why would people route payments through you? 04:25 < dannym> I'll try my hand at setting up the testnet today then 04:26 < Veggen> I thinbk most people should run LN f they 1) want it, or 2) need it for themselves (or their customers) 04:26 -!- rls [~rls@2600:8800:1e00:9e1:a885:6066:6f77:c599] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 04:26 < Veggen> to earn money? not currently, at least :) 04:29 < dannym> thanks for your help guys 04:29 < dannym> I'll try setting it up later today 04:30 -!- dannym [2e0b7732@gateway/web/freenode/ip.46.11.119.50] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 04:41 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@p595125-ipngn13401marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 04:42 -!- kleptoman [57d51606@gateway/web/freenode/ip.87.213.22.6] has joined #lnd 04:50 -!- intcat [~zshlyk@gateway/tor-sasl/intcat] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:58 -!- intcat [~zshlyk@gateway/tor-sasl/intcat] has joined #lnd 05:35 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@85.118.83.236] has joined #lnd 05:40 -!- nirved [~nirved@2a02:8071:b58a:3c00:65e4:5759:8f5f:308] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 05:42 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@85.118.83.236] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:43 < kleptoman> I forgot to write down the key for the lnd wallet.... running on top of bitcoind. Any way to read that private key and where can I read the public key to fund the address? I still have the password to unlock it? 05:53 -!- nirved [~nirved@2a02:8071:b58a:3c00:65c8:2abf:4403:de2d] has joined #lnd 05:55 < Veggen> you can use it, but it will be a risk. you can not restore from seed. 05:55 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@85-118-76-218.mtel.net] has joined #lnd 05:56 < Veggen> kleptoman: Any channels yet? 05:56 < Veggen> or is it completely new, without funds? in that case, just recreate. 05:57 -!- dionysus69 [~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/dionysus69] has joined #lnd 06:05 < kleptoman> completely new... it's running. Ok I'll re-create. Is there a shortcut to clean the LN wallet? 06:06 < Veggen> rm -rf ~/.lnd 06:06 < kleptoman> ah ok 06:06 < Veggen> lncli stop first 06:07 < Veggen> (or, kill it afterwards, works just as well since there is no funds) 06:08 < kleptoman> yeah did that... thanks. Creating a new wallet now 06:12 < kleptoman> and then I suppose I need to use: lncli newaddress to create a Bitcoin address to fund my wallet right? 06:12 < Veggen> yup. 06:13 < Veggen> and you did write down the seed? ;) 06:15 < kleptoman> hehe yeah 06:15 < kleptoman> Know where I can find some documentation about the difference between p2wkh and np2wkh? 06:17 < kleptoman> I mean ... P2WPKH is here https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0142.mediawiki (I suppose that's what it meant with 'p2wkh') 06:18 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@85-118-76-218.mtel.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 06:18 < Veggen> use p2wkh if you can spend to it. 06:18 < Veggen> (from the wallet you need to send from) 06:19 < Veggen> and there's no problem with just trying. either it works or it doesn't:) 06:19 < kleptoman> what is np2wkh? I also see p2pkh in the documentation. I assume that's the old (pre-segwit) address 06:21 < Veggen> it's the 3xxxxxx addreesses. 06:21 < kleptoman> I read this: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/64733/what-is-p2pk-p2pkh-p2sh-p2wpkh-eli5 but np2wkh is not on it. 06:21 < Veggen> p2pkh is native, bech32. 06:22 < lndbot> p2wkh is bech32 encoded and is a segwit tx so you pay less in fees. np2wkh is a backwards compatible addr for wallets who don’t support p2wkh, which looks like a normal multisig 06:22 < kleptoman> ah thanks 06:22 < lndbot> np 06:27 < kleptoman> just to be sure... is p2wkh te same as p2pwkh? 06:30 < lndbot> I don’t know what p2pwkh is, though I can’t say I know every address type 06:31 < kleptoman> It's the format mentioned in BIP142 06:31 < lndbot> p2wkh is different than p2pkh though 06:31 < kleptoman> Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash 06:32 < kleptoman> p2wkh would be Pay-to-Witness-Key-Hash I guess 06:32 < lndbot> BIP142 was withdrawn 06:34 < lndbot> only addresses I’ve seen in use are: legacy (1…) multisig (3….) p2wkh (bc1….) and np2wkh (which looks like a multisig, so 3….) 06:35 < zyp> BIP142 is not relevant for anything anymore 06:35 < kleptoman> hmm an overview of all address types would be useful. But I know about legacy, multisig.. and lately heard about bech32. Also though segwit addresses (non-bech32) were different 06:36 < kleptoman> yeah sorry about that... I googled 'p2wkh' and found that page 06:36 < zyp> kleptoman, there's only three or four address types, depending on how you count 06:36 < kleptoman> and the stackexchange also mentioned it, so I thought it was active 06:37 -!- nealsampat [059d0753@gateway/web/freenode/ip.5.157.7.83] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 06:37 < kleptoman> anyway .. .p2pkh is native according to Veggen, but that doesn't seem to be an option in lncli newaddress 06:37 < zyp> native what? 06:38 < kleptoman> don't know... that's what the reply was: [15:21] p2pkh is native, bech32. 06:38 < Veggen> p2wkh 06:38 < Veggen> sorry, my bad. 06:38 < zyp> p2pkh are legacy addrs 06:38 < kleptoman> alright 06:39 < lndbot> yes, `lnd` ripped support for generating those out, but of course it can still send to them if you want 06:39 < kleptoman> ok so got it .... both are segwit addresses, but 'p2wkh' is bech32 (bc1...) and 'np2wkh' is backwards compatible multisig (3...) 06:40 < zyp> if address types are confusing, it might help to learn a bit more about how bitcoin scripts work 06:40 < kleptoman> now all I need to check if my wallet (or bitcoin supplier) supports bech32 ... otherwise I need to use np2wkh 06:40 < zyp> correct 06:41 < kleptoman> my understanding was that bech32 is still rare in wallets 06:41 < zyp> yes 06:41 <@mlz> im closing all channels on this node that got that screwed up dust channel 06:41 < Veggen> but there's no harm in trying. 06:42 < Veggen> either your wallet accepts it ore not. and generating an address that's not being used does not harm anything. 06:42 < zyp> the thing is that as far as bitcoin itself is concerned, addresses doesn't exist, addresses is just a way of encoding scriptpubkeys 06:43 < kleptoman> Yeah I kinda know how that works... but never programmed any scripts myself 06:44 < zyp> 1-addresses contains a pubkey-hash and translates into a script that validates a provided key against the hash and then checks the signature against that key 06:44 < zyp> so 1-addresses can only translate into a script doing exactly that 06:46 < zyp> eventually, people wanted a way to use custom scripts, (e.g. to enforce multisig rules), and for that reason P2SH (3-addresses were created) 06:46 < kleptoman> Would MAST be a 3-address? 06:47 < zyp> 3-addresses contains the hash of a script and translates into a script that checks a provided serialized script against that hash, before running the provided script itself 06:47 -!- yapamoto [c0285f1d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.192.40.95.29] has joined #lnd 06:47 < zyp> so to make a multisig address, you make a script validating the multisig rules, hash the script and encode the hash as a 3-address 06:48 < zyp> to spend an output like that, the original script you hashed must be provided, called a redeemscript 06:49 < kleptoman> Right and with MAST you'd provide the merkleproof? 06:50 < lndbot> re: MAST - I don’t know, but I don’t think so. One shortcoming of P2SH is you have to reveal the script when its spent, but from my understanding MAST doesn’t have to reveal the whole script so it looks identical to P2SH but there could be other script paths that are never revealed 06:50 < zyp> MAST is not getting its own address format (AFAIK), so MAST would be wrapped in P2SH 06:50 < zyp> I haven't been following recently, so I might have missed something 06:51 < zyp> now, the thing about segwit is that it introduces new rules for the scriptpubkey 06:51 < lndbot> yeah me neither, please understand I’m only going off of what I’ve heard and read, but I don’t know anything concrete about MAST 06:52 < zyp> instead of having actual script opcodes in the scriptpubkey, segwit only stores a version tag and what they call a "witness program" 06:52 < kleptoman> Seems like it's been ready to go for a while... should have been possible since last August. https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0114.mediawiki 06:53 < kleptoman> Would be funny to have a "witness protection program" :) 06:53 < zyp> since segwit creates a new scriptpubkey format, it also needs a new address format, i.e. bech32 06:54 < zyp> BIP142 was an older proposal, but it got obsoleted by BIP173 (bech32) 06:56 < zyp> to support legacy wallet software, the segwit spec says that the version/witness program can also be used as a P2SH redeemscript, instead of a scriptpubkey 06:56 < zyp> i.e. hash it and make a 3-address 06:57 < zyp> this is what people call np2wkh or P2SH-P2WPKH or whatever 07:00 -!- tiagotrs [~user@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 07:06 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has joined #lnd 07:07 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@p595125-ipngn13401marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp] has joined #lnd 07:11 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 07:13 -!- kleptoman [57d51606@gateway/web/freenode/ip.87.213.22.6] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 07:18 < lndbot> bech32 is an amazing encoding standard too btw 07:19 -!- pwkad_ [pwkad@gateway/shell/xshellz/x-ldymlurpztjtvewq] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:20 < lndbot> similar to bitcoin keys in that visually similar characters are omitted, but its also carefully chosen to create more efficient QR codes (though funnily enough, LND doesn’t use this AFAIK) and it has a checksum too to ensure the data is copied intact 07:21 < zyp> the old base58 encoding also has a checksum 07:22 < zyp> the difference regarding qr codes is that bech32 doesn't distinguish case, the base58 encoding does 07:22 < zyp> and qr codes have a caseless encoding that uses less space per character 07:22 < lndbot> and adding a human readable portion means you can identify what the data is :slightly_smiling_face: 07:23 < zyp> on the other hand, the base58 encoding requires less characters 07:23 -!- jimpo [~jimpo@ec2-52-42-179-84.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 07:24 < zyp> the best part of the bech32 scheme is that it's forward compatible 07:24 < zyp> since it encodes both the witness version and the witness program 07:27 < zyp> i.e. next time bitcoin gets a feature upgrade with new witness programs, it's already defined how to encode them in addresses, so any software compatible with bech32 should already support sending bitcoin to such addresses 07:28 -!- jimpo [~jimpo@ec2-52-42-179-84.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com] has joined #lnd 07:36 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@p595125-ipngn13401marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 07:38 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@77.70.119.51] has joined #lnd 07:42 -!- lnostdal_ [~lnostdal@77.70.119.51] has joined #lnd 07:43 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@77.70.119.51] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 07:48 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #lnd 07:52 < cjd[m]> zyp: which base32 ? :) 07:53 < cjd[m]> RFC ? Bernstein ? Crockford ? 07:54 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has joined #lnd 07:58 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@50.90.83.229] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:59 <@mlz> bech32 08:02 < cjd[m]> oh lol, completely misread 08:02 < cjd[m]> Feels Like A Monday 08:09 <@mlz> actually the title of this bip is: "Title: Base32 address format for native v0-16 witness outputs" 08:10 <@mlz> i saw the devs talk about using base32 so i guess bech32 uses base32 08:10 <@mlz> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0173.mediawiki 08:12 <@mlz> " Why use base32 at all? The lack of mixed case makes it more efficient to read out loud or to put into QR codes. It does come with a 15% length increase, but that does not matter when copy-pasting addresses." 08:12 <@mlz> lolol.. this is funny.. "Why call it Bech32? "Bech" contains the characters BCH (the error detection algorithm used) and sounds a bit like "base"." 08:16 -!- aakselrod [aakselrod@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/aakselrod] has joined #lnd 08:16 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@104.137.194.255] has joined #lnd 08:18 -!- ChunkyPuffs [~ChunkyPuf@gateway/tor-sasl/chunkypuffs] has joined #lnd 08:22 < Veggen> hrmf. 08:22 < Veggen> I do not understand why my new nodeannouncement isn't used instead of the old one :) 08:24 < Veggen> http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/YjRvVp7TD5/ 08:25 < Veggen> when the Timestamp in the last line there is the timestamp of the newly changed nodeannouncement, why isn't it used the next time my node sends its own nodeannouncement? 08:28 -!- grafcaps [~haroldbr@104.137.194.255] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 08:34 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 08:42 < Veggen> I can also see the addresses in the one I got... 08:44 < lndbot> node announcements have an expiry time, just assuming but I guess nodes don’t gossip node announcements if they still have an unexpired node announcement messag 08:45 < lndbot> probably prevents DoS spam with node announcement messages too 08:45 < Veggen> tyzbit: but I see that I have sent out NodeAnnouncements after I have changed it - with the old timestamp. 08:46 < Veggen> I changed it this morning, and the nodeannouncements I sent out since then had the old timestamp, the one created upon startup. 08:46 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 08:47 < lndbot> idk, not familiar with the code myself but lnd might only figure out its node announcement message on startup 08:47 < lndbot> might just have to restart the daemon 08:48 < Veggen> tyzbit: which defeats what I am trying to do :) 08:48 < lndbot> yeah, or refactor that part of the code :slightly_smiling_face: 08:48 < Veggen> I am trying to update external ip address without restarting the node, so that it can be done automatically in a script when it changes, for example. 08:48 < lndbot> I think that would be awesome to do though, since then you can change advertised IPs or aliases while running 08:49 < lndbot> ah, yeah! that’s the ticket! 08:49 < Veggen> tyzbit: the point is, I have created a new nodeannountement, to the point that if I run genNodeAnnouncement(), it fetches my updated one. 08:50 < Veggen> but the old one is the one that is gossiped, still. 08:51 < lndbot> I’ve got a proposed BOLT that formalizes a way to look up nodes from domain names too, and if that gets approved then we could update the types of gossiped addresses to include domain names / dynamic DNS https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc/compare/master...tyzbit:bolt07-domain-addrs 08:55 -!- ser [~ser@gnu/translator/ser] has joined #lnd 08:58 < Veggen> ok. I see my errors. This was more complicated. 08:58 < Veggen> but not unsolvable, I guess. 08:59 -!- nhill [~nhill@192.241.254.22] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.4.2] 09:07 -!- pioklo [Pioklo@ip-91.246.70.194.skyware.pl] has joined #lnd 09:19 -!- fusion44 [~fusion44@p2E59F9E0.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #lnd 09:23 -!- lnostdal_ is now known as lnostdal 09:49 -!- Giszmo [~leo@190.8.79.154] has joined #lnd 09:51 -!- pioklo [Pioklo@ip-91.246.70.194.skyware.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 10:16 -!- aakselrod [aakselrod@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/aakselrod] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 10:23 -!- Giszmo [~leo@190.8.79.154] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 10:26 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/saleemrashid] has joined #lnd 10:53 -!- tiagotrs [~user@p5DC473D7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #lnd 10:53 -!- tiagotrs [~user@p5DC473D7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Changing host] 10:53 -!- tiagotrs [~user@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has joined #lnd 11:04 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:08 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 11:10 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Client Quit] 11:24 -!- iv4n [~iv4n@94.140.141.246] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 11:25 -!- Guest47729 [~haakonn@146.185.155.218] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:31 < NoImNotNineVolt> ... it works! 11:38 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@nagini-254.dynamic.rpi.edu] has joined #lnd 11:50 -!- drexl [~drexl@37.58.58.230] has joined #lnd 11:56 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has joined #lnd 12:03 -!- vertian [4ba88ba8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.75.168.139.168] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 12:09 -!- drexl [~drexl@37.58.58.230] has quit [Quit: drexl] 12:36 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@nagini-254.dynamic.rpi.edu] has quit [Quit: colatkinson] 12:42 -!- tiagotrs [~user@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 12:42 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Excess Flood] 12:43 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #lnd 12:43 -!- tiagotrs [~user@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has joined #lnd 12:43 -!- shtirlic [~shtirlic@ec2-35-158-173-101.eu-central-1.compute.amazonaws.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 12:46 -!- shtirlic [~shtirlic@Shtirlic-2-pt.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net] has joined #lnd 12:49 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@lithosphere-16.dynamic2.rpi.edu] has joined #lnd 12:55 -!- pioklo [Pioklo@ip-91.246.70.194.skyware.pl] has joined #lnd 12:57 -!- yapamoto [c0285f1d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.192.40.95.29] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:00 -!- dionysus69 [~Thunderbi@unaffiliated/dionysus69] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 13:01 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #lnd 13:01 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef pushed 1 new commit to master: https://git.io/vx5M7 13:01 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 16c304a Karlson Lee: docs/grpc/python remove witness_only 13:02 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 13:02 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@lithosphere-16.dynamic2.rpi.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:29 -!- fusion44 [~fusion44@p2E59F9E0.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has left #lnd [] 13:30 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@xdsl-188-155-63-9.adslplus.ch] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:34 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@xdsl-188-155-63-9.adslplus.ch] has joined #lnd 13:40 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@xdsl-188-155-63-9.adslplus.ch] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 13:42 -!- intcat [~zshlyk@gateway/tor-sasl/intcat] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 13:45 -!- intcat [~zshlyk@gateway/tor-sasl/intcat] has joined #lnd 13:50 < s7r> how far is lnd from being ready to be used on merchant side? 13:58 <@mlz> s7r, it's being used by some merchants already 13:59 < s7r> ok. is there any risk? can you lose funds if you suddenly go offline for some time, like when it's time to close a channel or watch for an old-channel-state broadcast? 13:59 -!- spudowiar [~spudowiar@unaffiliated/saleemrashid] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.1] 14:00 <@mlz> i guess you didn't hear about someone who did just that 14:02 < s7r> no , I am not sure what you mean. I know it's a theoretical problem at least, and i am wondering if it's covered or not as i recall there were some solutions on the roadmap 14:07 <@mlz> someone broadcasted an old state, not on purpose to cheat but lnd did its job: https://twitter.com/juscamarena/status/978074341513613312 14:07 <@mlz> https://twitter.com/alexbosworth/status/978069194385252352 14:09 < Veggen> s7r: you're really have to plan to broadcast only one old state, imho. 14:09 < Veggen> but it could be done, if you were offline for days. 14:10 < s7r> could it have done its job if it was offline? 14:10 < s7r> mlz ^ 14:11 <@mlz> what was offline? 14:11 <@mlz> the attacker? 14:12 <@mlz> oh the victims? im not sure if the victims are offline, will they be protected, Veggen ? 14:12 < lndbot> if the victim node was offline, no, but Lightning also has a way for nodes to give punishment information to special nodes called watchtowers. these watchtowers could be online and the victim could be offline and the malicious actor could still be offline. 14:12 < lndbot> watchtowers are coming soon, and I am very excited :slightly_smiling_face: 14:12 <@mlz> yea i think the question is for now when there's no watchtowers 14:13 <@mlz> https://twitter.com/bitconner/status/978078800624861184 14:13 < lndbot> if your channel has a timelock of 24 hours, all you need to do is get online at least once a day to punish cheaters. If you can’t guarantee you’ll be online that often, you can increase the locks on your channels. 14:17 < s7r> yea, this is what i mean 14:19 < Veggen> mlz: currently, no. 14:19 < Veggen> but wathtowers are not implemented yet. 14:19 < Veggen> I understand soon(tm) :) 14:26 < pepesza> exciting times! :-) 14:35 < s7r> indeed 14:35 < s7r> yeah watchovers is the last piece of the puzzle. and very important as its directly tied to security / funds security 14:40 <@mlz> s7r, we need more stores on LN, not enough anything to buy :D 14:47 -!- freannrak [~ar@188.166.55.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 14:49 -!- CubicEarths [~cubiceart@xdsl-188-155-63-9.adslplus.ch] has joined #lnd 14:54 < ChunkyPuffs> Can someone answer this for me?: 14:54 < ChunkyPuffs> Are most projects better off basing their projects on top of LN contracts? 14:54 -!- tiagotrs [~user@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 14:54 < ChunkyPuffs> such as internet of people, which wants to do all this fancy PoS stuff to secure their chain, when the ultimate goal is p2p service offering, like p2p uber. 14:54 < ChunkyPuffs> basic contracts like that would operate fine on Lightning, right? 14:55 < lndbot> no, LN isn’t a tincture for every use case 14:55 < lndbot> for example, p2p payments require setup that is necessarily 1hr+ long 14:55 < ChunkyPuffs> that's not true, is it? 14:55 < ChunkyPuffs> No, that can't be true. 14:55 < lndbot> hopefully you only have to do that setup once, but you need that first channel at the very least. 14:56 < ChunkyPuffs> true p2p is not needed. 14:56 < ChunkyPuffs> Autopilot is good enough, and an end user would never assume it wasn't p2p, right? 14:56 < ChunkyPuffs> There is no ledger where you don't need to wait business days in the real world. 14:56 < lndbot> if someone happens not to have a channel already opened to them from the network, then a channel open would be required 14:56 < lndbot> ex: someone _just_ started their business and nodes haven’t autopiloted to them yet 14:57 < ChunkyPuffs> one hour that is self-verifiable is better than any banking application/service which takes days to open an account. 14:57 < ChunkyPuffs> that's what you get when you actually get into competing with real bank ledgers 14:57 < lndbot> a 10 minute non-interactive bitcoin payment is preferable to lightning if you need to be able to send to anyone 14:57 < ChunkyPuffs> Well I'm talking about contracts.. 14:57 < ChunkyPuffs> livestreaming money. 14:57 < ChunkyPuffs> Are you not kind of under-representing the ability of lightning contracts? 14:58 < ChunkyPuffs> simple contracts like a p2p uber ride. 14:58 < ChunkyPuffs> uber without uber. 14:58 < lndbot> lightning just uses opcodes for the purposes of micropayments through payment channels 14:58 < ChunkyPuffs> what would that be best done on if not lightning? Certainly not eth, or an unproven PoS node tech. 14:59 < lndbot> it sounds like you’re talking about something in the covenant territory 15:01 < ChunkyPuffs> What is it? I've not heard of anything by that name. 15:01 -!- whythat [~whythat@gateway/tor-sasl/whythat] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.1] 15:16 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:16 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 15:24 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 15:25 -!- pioklo [Pioklo@ip-91.246.70.194.skyware.pl] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 15:31 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 15:37 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 15:50 -!- ChunkyPuffs [~ChunkyPuf@gateway/tor-sasl/chunkypuffs] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:52 -!- ChunkyPuffs [~ChunkyPuf@gateway/tor-sasl/chunkypuffs] has joined #lnd 16:03 < lndbot> I'm not well read-into the concept myself but this look like an informative post https://medium.com/the-litecoin-school-of-crypto/a-primer-to-covenants-cc58a4e815b3 16:04 < lndbot> essentially applying rules to bitcoin transactions according to specific criteria. in the uber example: you send bitcoin to your driver and he provides the service. If he drives off after you paid but before you get in, you can execute the covenant script and send the bitcoin to a 3rd party to arbitrate, who could be a person, a service, or more code. 16:29 -!- belcher_ [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 16:55 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] jimpo opened pull request #1066: discovery: Fix formatting issue in log line. (master...log-line-minor) https://git.io/vxdIc 16:57 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] cfromknecht opened pull request #1067: fundingmanager: fixes range-goroutine scoping bug (master...fmgr-scope-fix) https://git.io/vxdI8 17:18 -!- aakselrod [aakselrod@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/aakselrod] has joined #lnd 17:25 <@roasbeef> ctrlbreak: keep in mind that there really isn't all the much going on at the network at this point, most payments go to like 2 or 3 services 17:28 <@roasbeef> tyzbit: DNS isn't authenticated, stopped reading at that point even, anyone could just swap out data in transit to get you to connect to alternative nodes 17:29 <@roasbeef> ChunkyPuffs: uber works _because_ of the trust 17:29 < lndbot> if you have an invoice in hand, the advertised pubkeys wouldn't match and the user could be notified. 17:30 <@roasbeef> if you have an invoice, then you already made contact 17:31 < lndbot> right, but that's no guarantee you'll be able to successfully pay the invoice. Hopefully you would, but for a mobile user with a small amount of funds in few channels, the possibility goes up. 17:31 <@roasbeef> the invoice has a pubkey 17:31 < lndbot> I mean in terms of liquidity 17:32 <@roasbeef> ok? 17:32 < lndbot> if a mobile user has only one channel to a node, and that node can't route the payment, how does the user ensure the payment can go through? 17:33 < lndbot> the user usually looks up the destination node and attempts to connect, then open a channel but that's only possible if nodes advertise their addresses. 17:33 <@roasbeef> it's about verification 17:33 <@roasbeef> u can't authenticate the dns info as is specified 17:34 <@roasbeef> even if you try to match w/ the invoice, what if they swapped nodes? or it's round robbin resp? 17:34 <@roasbeef> if you look in the ML, this was brought up a while back 17:34 < lndbot> non-advertising, non-public nodes can still have an effective channel opened to them by letting the user look up the right node to connect to 17:34 <@roasbeef> DANE was tossed around, but then where's that actually implemented? 17:34 <@roasbeef> important thing is _how_ is that info looked up 17:34 < lndbot> I'll go back through the archives, I've only been reading the list for a couple weeks to be honest 17:34 <@roasbeef> and how is it authenticated 17:35 -!- melvster [~melvin@ip-86-49-18-198.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 17:35 < lndbot> right, and your point isn't a small one. 17:35 <@roasbeef> DNS is clear text, unauth'd trivially MiTm'd 17:35 <@roasbeef> yes, it's the most fundamental issue 17:35 <@roasbeef> which is why i stopped reading :p 17:36 < lndbot> fine by me, if consensus says it's a bad idea then even I wouldn't want it in the spec 17:37 < lndbot> however nodes _could_ advertise associated domains as part of the node announce message (or in their alias) to correlate data on lightning to DNS data, and clients could check pubkeys to ensure they match 17:37 < lndbot> I mean, in the alias, the extra data, or as an additional address type 17:37 < lndbot> though that last one is probably a nonstarter already 17:38 <@roasbeef> aliases aren't unique, enforced, or even really able to be authenticated 17:39 <@roasbeef> still you have the initial bootstrap issue 17:39 <@roasbeef> you basically want a CA here...but then there're other issues 17:40 < lndbot> how are aliases not able to be authenticated? obviously they're user-generated data but as part of the node announce message they're signed with the nodes pubkey, right? 17:41 <@roasbeef> how do i know that node actually associated with X? 17:42 < lndbot> if you had continued reading you'd have noted that I clarified this is not to replace bootstrapping, and the PR for the RFC has been updated to reflect as such. no node should use anything but a seed to bootstrap their view of the network, but it's up to a node operator to choose to whom their channels are opened, whether it's autopilot or manually picked. 17:43 < lndbot> 1. take a particular node in the graph, see it advertises "example.com" as its associated domain, node its pubkey 17:43 <@roasbeef> the "stop reading thing" was in jest :p 17:43 < lndbot> 2. look up _lightning._tcp.example.com and look for the node in the response, check its pubkey 17:43 <@roasbeef> what do you do if the pubkey isn't there? 17:43 < lndbot> 3. if they match, then you can correlate that node with whoever operates the domain 17:44 <@roasbeef> what if it is, but then tehre're others, how do you account for that? 17:44 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@203-179-90-205.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp] has joined #lnd 17:44 < lndbot> now, someone can hijack the domain, and further the possibility of MITM attacks, if unaddressed, would IMO kill this BOLT in the water 17:44 <@roasbeef> that's the #1 thing you need to answer 17:44 <@roasbeef> it's the weakest link 17:45 < lndbot> it depends on why you looked up that node 17:45 < lndbot> if it's part of a payment request, it gives some miniscule assurances that the node you're paying is associated with the operator of the domain (or whoever is in a privileged position to manipulate your DNS traffic) 17:47 < lndbot> ex: a barista at starbucks generating an invoice. you go to pay, your client looks up starbucks.com but doesn't see the dest node in the record because the barista is trying to MITM you. Starbuck's problem, for sure, but one that is aided by this functionality 17:48 -!- Styil [Styil@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/styil] has joined #lnd 17:49 < lndbot> I will definitely think on somehow compensating for or improving the situation regarding MITM for DNS records though 17:50 <@roasbeef> if the payreq is disaplyed on some screen i'm scanning physically at starbucks, why do i need to look up the node? 17:51 < lndbot> to give human readable info to the user to aid them in assurances that the transaction is what it seems 17:52 < lndbot> the problem is: as a user, if you _want_ to connect to Blockstream's node, how do you do that? 17:52 <@mlz> so the barista slipped in her lnd node and the payments now go to her? :D 17:52 < lndbot> calling out to the payee’s site every time you wanna make a payment is a pretty big side-channel for sender anonymity 17:53 < lndbot> mlz: essentially. Like I said, Starbucks' problem, but one that is aided with this 17:53 <@roasbeef> tyzbit: in order to do that, _securely_ you need some sort of CA system 17:54 < lndbot> anonymity is another problem, and if merchants deploy something like this widely as-is I concede it will greatly hurt it 17:56 <@roasbeef> you can't just handwave away the authenticity/integrity check 17:57 < lndbot> no you can't, and I appreciate the discussion as this has only existed in my mind and in brief discussions with rompert until now 18:01 <@mlz> oh..too bad, the aliens finally opened a channel with a good size amt to my node a few hours ago but now i have to close it 18:02 < lndbot> lol "the aliens" 18:02 <@mlz> :D 18:03 <@mlz> rompert has this cool rss feed: https://www.robtex.com/lightning/rss 18:10 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 18:12 <@roasbeef> ayy lmao 18:17 <@mlz> roasbeef, are we going to have a breaking change any time soon? 18:21 <@mlz> man.. i hope it's not the real pizza guy that runs the node "heliacal", it's such a trashy spammy node 18:26 <@roasbeef> no breaking changes, ever 18:34 <@mlz> yay! :D 18:58 -!- freannrak [~ar@188.166.55.44] has joined #lnd 19:06 -!- rls [~rls@2600:8800:1e00:9e1:54d8:252a:8424:3f19] has joined #lnd 19:09 -!- camulos [~user@180.251.202.173] has joined #lnd 19:09 -!- Deadhand [~deadhand@CPE6038e0be3871-CMf0f249a14e40.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Excess Flood] 19:09 -!- Deadhand [~deadhand@CPE6038e0be3871-CMf0f249a14e40.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #lnd 19:11 -!- shtirlic [~shtirlic@Shtirlic-2-pt.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 19:14 -!- shtirlic [~shtirlic@ec2-35-158-173-101.eu-central-1.compute.amazonaws.com] has joined #lnd 19:18 -!- Styil [Styil@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/styil] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 19:29 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #lnd 19:32 < lndbot> roasbeef: (if you're here) - what do you think of dropping in Namecoin as a replacement for the DNS functionality - a node reads the domain on the invoice, looks up the domain on the NC blockchain, confirms it's valid, and then presents a user with information that the invoice "resolves" to, for instance, blockstream.bit ? 19:33 < lndbot> I haven't checked to see what records namecoin support, for one, and for two namecoin is unfamiliar to users and most domain operators don't have namecoin domains yet - plus there's the issue of racing to register your own domain 19:35 < lndbot> positive side effect is increased adoption of namecoin which could help supplant legacy DNS... win/win/win? what's the fatal flaw lol 19:36 < lndbot> and that also addresses the privacy issues as a node can do a domain lookup locally 19:37 <@roasbeef> does namecoin even have a light client mode? 19:38 < lndbot> good question, I'm woefully ignorant of namecoins details but I'm definitely gonna start researching the idea 19:39 -!- dougsland [~douglas@c-73-234-93-65.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 19:40 < lndbot> on the question of records, we have 520 bytes max 19:40 < lndbot> that's a lot. 19:41 < lndbot> I'll follow up sometime this week on the list with the idea, in any case. 19:41 < lightningbot2> Namecoin does not have a light client mode afaia 19:42 < lightningbot2> Project was mostly abandoned I think, the inherent incentives also caused problems with name squatting 19:44 < lndbot> definitely a thorn in the side of onboarding established entities as new users to LN - I'm sure very few entities actually own their respective .bit domains 19:45 < lndbot> well, a thorn in the side of human readable domains though 19:45 < lndbot> @RealMcdonalds [verified] here we come lol 19:47 < lndbot> however, there might be a domain convention we could use to identify lightning nodes, maybe like google.lightning.bit or something 19:47 < lndbot> hell, people could use LN payments to monetize those domains they've been squatting 19:47 < lightningbot2> http://randomwalker.info/publications/namespaces.pdf 19:48 < lndbot> 2018-04-03 Binaries of ConsensusJ-Namecoin (the Namecoin lightweight SPV lookup client) v0.2.7 are now released on the Beta Downloads page page. This is based on the source code that was released earlier. Notable new things in this release: 19:50 < lightningbot2> This paper outlines a lot of challenges with decentralized pkis/namespaces, and highlights some things that namecoin leaves to be desired 19:50 < lndbot> I'm gonna give it a read now 19:51 < lndbot> those squatters could atomically swap their domains to the highest bidder tho, so the "rightful" owner of those domains could simply pay for them and the owner of the .bit domain can get btc for being a shitty person 19:51 < lndbot> just typing that sentence hurt me emotionally 19:52 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:55 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef pushed 1 new commit to master: https://git.io/vxdZa 19:55 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 9d29c4f Olaoluwa Osuntokun: server: only swap out the port for inbound connections... 20:01 < lightningbot2> Definitely, I think that was the original intent. Tho the squatting issue arises because there is zero cost to continue holding on to a name, even if the holder is not deriving any utility from having the name. To avoid squatting, the incentive structure should encourage people to relinquish names that aren’t actively generating utility for the owner 20:02 < lightningbot2> Can move to another channel to discuss more if you’d like :) 20:04 < lndbot> I'm a slack-only plebian unfortunately, but feel free to hit me up there, or perhaps make a private channel and invite people in so we can discuss 20:04 < lndbot> in fact, I'll preemptively make one and invite you if you wish 20:04 < lndbot> oh dang just noticed making channels is disallowed on the lnd slack -- DERP 20:04 < lndbot> even private ones 20:05 < lndbot> could do a group convo of <8 though 20:05 < lndbot> heh its a heart 20:05 < lndbot> or a bouquet of .... grapes? 20:39 -!- scottcal [48c09ae8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.72.192.154.232] has joined #lnd 20:40 < scottcal> its my understanding that the lnd wallet should be unlocked to be able to work properly as a node is that correct? 20:40 < lndbot> yes, that's correct. 20:41 < scottcal> ok thanks, so I find that my wallet is locking by itself. is there a way other than a cron to keep the lnd wallet unlocked? 20:43 < scottcal> I don't see a time limit on the unlock feature either 20:43 < lndbot> after you unlock your wallet, it will stay unlocked while the daemon is running which means for some reason your daemon (lnd) may be terminating 20:44 < lndbot> are you stopping the daemon yourself? 20:44 < scottcal> yea possibly, I am using systemd to keep it running 20:44 -!- camulos1 [~user@36.88.53.45] has joined #lnd 20:45 < scottcal> I am going to check the log 20:45 -!- camulos [~user@180.251.202.173] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 20:48 < scottcal> seems I got this before it restarted 20:48 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef pushed 2 new commits to master: https://git.io/vxdcu 20:48 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 8e77e1e Johan T. Halseth: lnwallet/channel: add NewLocalForceCloseSummary... 20:48 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 32ad632 Olaoluwa Osuntokun: Merge pull request #956 from halseth/channel-newlocalforceclosesummary... 20:48 < scottcal> lnd.conf:18: strconv.ParseUint: parsing "1.1": invalid syntax 20:48 < lndbot> ah, so it starts, you unlock and it reads the config and crashes 20:48 < lndbot> what was the setting you were trying to set on that line? 20:49 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef closed pull request #1043: (g)make calls dep which is not in $PATH (master...patch-1) https://git.io/vxH51 20:49 < scottcal> checking it now it ran though for about 8 hours 20:49 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef pushed 1 new commit to master: https://git.io/vxdc2 20:49 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 4b2cb68 Jim Posen: discovery: Fix formatting issue in log line. 20:50 -github-lnd:#lnd- [lnd] Roasbeef pushed 2 new commits to master: https://git.io/vxdca 20:50 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 5c43e0a Conner Fromknecht: fundingmanager: fixes range-goroutine scoping bug... 20:50 -github-lnd:#lnd- lnd/master 12cb35a Olaoluwa Osuntokun: Merge pull request #1067 from cfromknecht/fmgr-scope-fix... 20:50 < lndbot> just check line 18 of your config 20:51 < scottcal> oh it's the feerate I was testing and change it to see if it changed the feereport 20:51 < scottcal> bitcoin.feerate=1.1 20:51 < scottcal> I am going to set it back down see if it fixes it 20:51 < lndbot> the feerate is typically a very small number, the default is .000001 20:52 < scottcal> it says in the help that that default is 1 20:52 < lndbot> ah I apologize 20:53 < lndbot> I assume that feerate in the config then is an integer, and 1 is the minimum amount 20:53 < scottcal> no problem odd that it wouldn't parse 1.1 maybe integer 20:53 < scottcal> yea 20:53 < lndbot> therefore setting it to 2 might be the next smallest feerate 20:53 < lndbot> rather, next biggest 20:53 < scottcal> ok I'll try 2 and 0 and see how those work 20:54 < scottcal> thanks 21:10 < scottcal> I seem to be getting one more error in my lnd.conf 21:10 < scottcal> unknown option: bitcoind.rpcuser 21:10 < scottcal> looks like a valid options in the help tho 21:19 < lndbot> maybe you need to quote the user, if you have weird characters? 21:22 < scottcal> no weird characters, but I'll try to quote 21:26 -!- iv4n [~iv4n@94.140.141.246] has joined #lnd 21:30 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-37-38-86-200.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 21:47 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 21:54 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@203-179-90-205.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 21:57 -!- Relaed [~yaoyuan@203-179-90-205.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp] has joined #lnd 22:08 -!- scottcal [48c09ae8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.72.192.154.232] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 22:21 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 22:49 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:50 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 22:54 -!- treethought [~treethoug@cpe-108-185-249-110.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 22:56 -!- AndBobsYourUncle [~AndBobsYo@cpe-23-240-21-154.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 22:59 -!- frib [~dynorsau@2601:585:8200:f585:d4a7:6bc8:b548:b15c] has joined #lnd 23:03 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: colatkinson] 23:16 -!- frib [~dynorsau@2601:585:8200:f585:d4a7:6bc8:b548:b15c] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 23:17 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 23:20 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Client Quit] 23:28 -!- richard87 [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:28 -!- richard87_ [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has joined #lnd 23:38 -!- richard87_ [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:41 -!- richard87 [~richard87@237.92-221-98.customer.lyse.net] has joined #lnd 23:52 -!- colatkinson [~colatkins@cpe-67-240-56-42.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #lnd 23:57 -!- sovjet [~sovjet@193.189.166.102] has joined #lnd