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 2024/02/12 #1134

Closed
11 of 22 tasks
t-bast opened this issue Feb 5, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed
11 of 22 tasks

Lightning Specification Meeting 2024/02/12 #1134

t-bast opened this issue Feb 5, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator

t-bast commented Feb 5, 2024

The meeting will take place on Monday 2024/02/12 at 7pm UTC (5:30am Adelaide time) on Libera Chat IRC #lightning-dev. It is open to the public.

A video link is available for higher bandwidth communication: https://meet.jit.si/Lightning-Spec-Meeting

Special topics

Recently Updated Proposals / Seeking Review

This section contains changes that have been opened or updated recently and need feedback from the meeting participants.

Stale Proposals

This section contains pending changes that may not need feedback from the meeting participants, unless someone explicitly asks for it during the meeting. These changes are usually waiting for implementation work to happen to drive more feedback.

Waiting for interop

This section contains changes that have been conceptually ACKed and are waiting for at least two implementations to fully interoperate.
They most likely don't need to be covered during the meeting, unless someone asks for updates.

Long Term Updates

This section contains long-term changes that need review, but require a substantial implementation effort.

@t-bast t-bast pinned this issue Feb 5, 2024
@Roasbeef
Copy link
Collaborator

v3 txns:

  • really happening now, one of the first thing merged
  • 1p1c?
    • questions re the zero conf setting, maybe v3 needs minor tweaks to make sure that you can't broadcast if you have two parents
    • could potentially break zero conf
    • only p2p? not sure what
  • 1000 vbyte limit?
    • constrains how much the attacker can may you pay
    • smaller you put this, the more bounds you have on the attacker
    • in theory w/ 483 HTLCs each direction, that's really large, so 800k sats of miner fee
  • is the design too constrained as is?
    • there's an upgrade path, with the current mempool stuff this is the initial path
    • post cluster mempool and other research, then we can start to look at relaxing the rules
  • commitment tx changes:
    • zero fee commitment, one anchor
    • can put the dust HTLCs inside the ephemeral anchor output, can use that to pay fees (?)
    • eliminate update_fee
    • new tnx will still be non-std in the next code release, have more time to see how it interplays
  • deployment pipeline:
    • v3 code in bitcoind release
    • update commitment format
    • dyn commit to upgrade the commitment format

new DNS-based addr/invoice resolution:

  • how do add offers stuff?
    • add another round trip to be able to do the offer
    • can just include the user name in the domain and the invoice request
    • may not be able to have a distinct node for the offer vs responder?
  • should also carve out a larger experimental range for the TLVs in the offer?
    • minimal offer is pubkey + description
  • how easy is DNSSEC to add on the server-side in 2024?
    • should just be a check box for any base DNS service
    • cloudflare, etc -- they all have them
    • some shitty registrars will charge you
  • all clients need to implement DNSSEC validation?
  • matt has server+resolver impl: https://http-dns-prover.as97444.net/
    • can use DoH (DNS over HTTPs) as well
    • can connect out on TCP port 53, etc

zero reserve:

  • feature bit route is more robust
    • nodes able to distinguish those that support vs not
  • asymmetric version?
    • can also just relax what you accept at an initial version
  • feature bit semantics: I accept and you accept it?
  • move to migrate the bLIP to a BOLT, something ppl seem to be asking for a lot

funding v2 + dual funding:

  • turns out can't remove the req to send the entire transaction
    • needed to handle segwit edge cases

rbf coop close:

  • lnd close to interop
  • eclair has the branch open, will commit to it given another impl
  • upgrade supported?
    • if negotiate for old version, will it accept and allow you to try to RBF the old one?
      • lnd looking to allow that, if possible

trampoline:

  • PR rebased, new test vectors
  • LDK working on a version

taproot gossip stuff:

channel jamming:

  • PoC thing up, starts setting stuff in the interceptor
  • can start to relay the field sooner

liquidity ads:

  • JIT channels for liquidity ads
  • is it helpful to pin the HTLC in the first state?
    • may require more trust in either way, to actually relay the HTLC, etc
  • thing t-bast worked on in the past related to this: https://gist.github.com/t-bast/69018875f4f95e660ec2cbbc80f711a6
    • does something to tie things into open+accept channel?

peer storage:

  • lnd to start working on new version
    • has idea to also store HTLC state to improve the SCB recovery story
  • trivia impl, can do w/e afterwards

@t-bast t-bast unpinned this issue Feb 21, 2024
@t-bast t-bast closed this as completed Feb 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants