|
Title: Lightning Funding Question Post by: jaybird777 on May 31, 2018, 01:01:39 AM Trying to get up to speed on Lightning... Has SIGHASH_NOINPUT been activated as a means to create refund insurance on the initial multisig deposit (as described in the Lightning Whitepaper), or have devs found an alternative workaround that doesn't require a softfork?
Title: Re: Lightning Funding Question Post by: DarkStar_ on May 31, 2018, 02:22:00 AM No, it is currently an unactivated soft fork known as BIP 118 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0118.mediawiki). I don't think the devs have found a workaround, and are just waiting to see what happens, given that SIGHASH_NOINPUT was not a formal proposal in the past.
Before we can implement eltoo, we need a minor change to Bitcoin: the introduction of the SIGHASH_NOINPUT flag for signatures. This was first discussed a few months ago in the context of watchtowers to help secure Lightning channels, but was not formally proposed. A formal proposal may now be found in the eltoo paper. Title: Re: Lightning Funding Question Post by: jaybird777 on May 31, 2018, 08:17:16 PM Gotcha, so does that mean bi-directional LN channels are at a standstill until BIP 118 gets ratified?
|