Distributed systems themselves weren’t exactly new and had been actively researched for a number of years prior to the creation of Bitcoin. ● UTXO spendable by me or deposit to exchange after 5 years? ● Why does Bitcoin Core rebroadcast transactions? This is why the extension requires the permission to access any webpage. Why is the fee for the commitment transaction paid by the opener of the channel? The goal is to just get to a point where the commitment transaction doesn’t pay any fee so that everything is simpler. So, since our goal is rather to go in the direction of removing update fee entirely and using zero-fee commitment transactions, we’re just not going to bother changing how the fee is paid before we get to that point. Greg Sanders: Yeah, we’d be able to get rid of that message, the update fee that t-bast was talking about, which would be great.
Greg Sanders: Yeah, I can speak to that a bit. Greg Sanders: Well, statechains is another thing that needs – It’s any time-based contract, right? Because it’s one thing to have the code, let’s say, launched and Bitcoin Core nodes get updated, and eventually the network updates enough where you can rely upon it. For LN-Symmetry, I didn’t have to pull this around because there’s no penalties, so I just, in memory, hold these nonces and then complete signatures just in time. These descriptors provide a comprehensive way to describe to software what output scripts you want to find, and it’s expected to be adapted over time to other parts of the Bitcoin Core API such as importprivkey, importaddress, importpubkey, importmulti, and importwallet. So, you can point out any output that has sufficient funds to have basically funded that channel; I assume that means enough or more. So, everyone should have a transaction they’re happy with now. Basically, I think there’s some basic agreement on this line that we’re shooting for with package relay, v3, and ephemeral anchors, where the commitment transaction can get a very nice cleanup and improvement and kind of confirmation requirements, while the rest, there’s still some pinning vectors beyond that with HTLC transactions.
For example, batching customer withdrawals may save on fees for the enterprise, but will likely make child pays for parent (CPFP) uneconomical for a customer who wishes to speed up the transaction. So now, it’s going to be a very simple version of RBF, where the incentive should be properly aligned because only one party is paying the fees and they are the one proposing that RBF. This way, it’s indistinguishable from any other taproot output, whereas right now, funding outputs are witness script hash of 2-of-2 multisig, which is really easy to distinguish onchain. LN closing transactions to be able to pay any segwit script version, including script types that don’t yet have consensus meaning on the network, such as addresses for taproot. Pieter Wuille posted the slides from a presentation he gave summarizing progress, including text indicating he thought the proposal was “nearly ready”. The 30-minute presentation covers each point concisely, making it an excellent high-level overview for anyone interested in learning about the Bitcoin fee market and how to mitigate expected fee increases. After providing a high-level overview of Schnorr signatures and signature aggregation-information probably already familiar to readers of this newsletter-Lee builds a significant portion of his presentation around 2-of-3 multisig security for business spenders, a feature used by many businesses today.
CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY (CSV) could allow users to detect and block attempts to steal their money by a thief who had gained access to the user’s private keys, a capability previously referred to as providing Bitcoin vaults. Discussion participants seemed to all favor providing an equivocation proof, although there was some concern that it could be too much work for the v0 specification. This question, I guess, is for Murch, Greg or t-bast, but are there other layer 2 protocols that we see having an interest in contributing to some of these discussions? There’s also a bit of talk about, I guess, the lack of penalty. So, I would talk to Bastien quite a bit, I would talk to the statechains people. 18894 fixes a UI bug that affected people who simultaneously used multi-wallet mode in the GUI and manual coin control. For additional information, see CLN’s manual pages for 바이낸스 입금시간 commando and commando-rune. The usage examples highlight this fact. Because we’ve always been discussing the fact that announcing, having the channel announcement point to a specific onchain output, was quite bad for privacy and that we could probably do better. So, those are things that we’ve always been just hand-wavy about how we would do that in the future.