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
According to @t-bast, the trampoline routing fees of the Acinq node were recently raised to 0.4%
The highest fee level tried by Electrum is 0.3% plus a base fee of 100 sats:
That is correct, we indeed raised our trampoline fees to 0.4% + 4 sats. We do reject payments that use a lower fee. This can be an issue in the multi-trampoline setting, but as was discussed with the introduction of blinded paths, there won't be a need for multi-trampoline payments in the future: a single trampoline node paying to a blinded path guarantees privacy while being more efficient than using multiple trampoline nodes.
Values for exponential search are based on available fee budget:
we try with budget/64, budget/32, ..., budget/1 (spread uniformly among the selected Trampoline Forwarders).
Hence, if we make the fee budget configurable, that will usefully affect the trampoline fees as well.
related spesmilo#9033
Values for exponential search are based on available fee budget:
we try with budget/64, budget/32, ..., budget/1 (spread uniformly among the selected Trampoline Forwarders).
Hence, if we make the fee budget configurable, that will usefully affect the trampoline fees as well.
related spesmilo#9033
According to @t-bast, the trampoline routing fees of the Acinq node were recently raised to 0.4%
The highest fee level tried by Electrum is 0.3% plus a base fee of 100 sats:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: