You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I suspect this is yet another issue with disagreement of fees, and c-lightning decides to close the channels down.
It's far too trigger happy. Can't it solve it another way? like just start a timer and if it still disagrees after X blocks, then it can [preferably cooperatively] close it.
We are ending up with two lightning networks now, if channels between lnd and clightning can't be stable. It will certainly hurt routing a lot. We old guys remember when the same thing happened to Internet. Wasn't pretty.
Thanks in advance
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Delaying to do a cooperative close on a bad feerate is attackable: #1443 (comment) (although it is possible the attack scenario is unfeasible)
What exactly is the fee disagreement? If the lnd side is proposing a fee of 250 sat/ksipa then c-lightning will never accept that since bitcoind will never accept that either: #1251 . See also Eclair issue, which will also be fixed similarly (i.e. impose 253 sat/ksipa minimum): ACINQ/eclair#602
The fee smoothing implemented in #1650 has reduced this issue massively. In the long term we will remove fee commitments from the protocol altogether, finally removing this source of disagreement.
2018-05-27 10:56:45.762 [INF] CRTR: Block 000000000000000000391f3392faf6b5a9cb720c23dc502e6bdafcbab8c5cae3 (height=524634) closed 203 channels
I suspect this is yet another issue with disagreement of fees, and c-lightning decides to close the channels down.
It's far too trigger happy. Can't it solve it another way? like just start a timer and if it still disagrees after X blocks, then it can [preferably cooperatively] close it.
We are ending up with two lightning networks now, if channels between lnd and clightning can't be stable. It will certainly hurt routing a lot. We old guys remember when the same thing happened to Internet. Wasn't pretty.
Thanks in advance
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: