From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail•com>
To: Billy Tetrud <billy.tetrud@gmail•com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Conjectures on solving the high interactivity issue in payment pools and channel factories
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 16:45:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mcikQmSFmiZw6Tq1GocybVcjGHNc-u9cP1aoZpJU-HEfgcqXXi1WhZSnEDMtEz3GfqAJGWpfZXjEBmsCXNSyLAgVNNcsSklERd-DJ8KeocE=@protonmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGpPWDa2wofye=KSq-vVNS0SOU34st9wm-hMhiYzGLTKMGuP5w@mail.gmail.com>
Good morning Billy,
> Very interesting exploration. I think you're right that there are issues with the kind of partitioning you're talking about. Lightning works because all participants sign all offchain states (barring data loss). If a participant can be excluded from needing to agree to a new state, there must be an additional mechanism to ensure the relevant state for that participant isn't changed to their detriment.
>
> To summarize my below email, the two techniques I can think for solving this problem are:
>
> A. Create sub-pools when the whole group is live that can be used by the sub- pool participants later without the whole group's involvement. The whole group is needed to change the whole group's state (eg close or open sub-pools), but sub-pool states don't need to involve the whole group.
Is this not just basically channel factories?
To reduce the disruption if any one pool participant is down, have each sub-pool have only 2 participants each.
More participants means that the probability that one of them is offline is higher, so you use the minimum number of participants in the sub-pool: 2.
This makes any arbitrary sub-pool more likely to be usable.
But a 2-participant pool is a channel.
So a large multiparticipant pool with sub-pools is just a channel factory for a bunch of channels.
I like this idea because it has good tradeoffs, so channel factories ho.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-10 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-28 13:18 Antoine Riard
2022-05-01 22:53 ` Billy Tetrud
2022-05-10 0:38 ` Antoine Riard
2022-05-10 16:45 ` ZmnSCPxj [this message]
2022-05-12 17:36 ` Billy Tetrud
2023-03-17 20:54 ` jlspc
2023-04-18 3:38 ` Antoine Riard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='mcikQmSFmiZw6Tq1GocybVcjGHNc-u9cP1aoZpJU-HEfgcqXXi1WhZSnEDMtEz3GfqAJGWpfZXjEBmsCXNSyLAgVNNcsSklERd-DJ8KeocE=@protonmail.com' \
--to=zmnscpxj@protonmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=billy.tetrud@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox