Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Lightning Specification Meeting 2020/03/16 #756

Open
t-bast opened this issue Mar 16, 2020 · 7 comments
Open

Lightning Specification Meeting 2020/03/16 #756

t-bast opened this issue Mar 16, 2020 · 7 comments

Comments

@t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator

@t-bast t-bast commented Mar 16, 2020

The meeting will take place on Monday 2020/03/16 on IRC #lightning-dev. It is open to the public.

Pull Request Review

  • Reply channel range simplification #737
  • BOLT11 additional and negative tests #736
  • TLV message extensions #754
  • Stuck channels #740
  • Wumbo advisory for scaling confirmations #746

Long Term Updates

Backlog

The following are topics that we should discuss at some point, so if we have time to discuss them great, otherwise they slip to the next meeting.

  • Upfront payments / DoS protection

Post-Meeting notes:

Action items

The full logs can be found here

@t-bast t-bast pinned this issue Mar 16, 2020
@joostjager

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

@joostjager joostjager commented Mar 16, 2020

  • Anchor commitment format: one vs two anchors
  • Channel jamming: is it a priority?
@t-bast

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@t-bast t-bast commented Mar 16, 2020

Added anchor outputs. What's channel jamming?

@joostjager

This comment has been minimized.

@t-bast

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@t-bast t-bast commented Mar 16, 2020

Gotcha, upfront payments/spam (why yet another name?). I'll add to the backlog.

@joostjager

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

@joostjager joostjager commented Mar 16, 2020

I think spam downplays the vulnerability. It sounds more like nuisance, not like taking a channel out of service for two weeks within a few minutes.

@t-bast

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@t-bast t-bast commented Mar 16, 2020

True, this is really a potential denial-of-service

@joostjager

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

@joostjager joostjager commented Mar 16, 2020

Even denial-of-service suggests (to me at least) that it requires ongoing effort from the attacker. I think it is important to make a distinction between both classes of denial-of-service. With channel jamming the cost to the attacker is totally negligible compared to the damage done.

@cdecker cdecker unpinned this issue Mar 30, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.