If you're not keeping your node onoine then you're going to have to start it at least as often as the timelock runs out for the channel (you can verify this number from its stats). If you don't put your channel back online before this time is up, there's a chance the other party can claim your funds afaik.
The other party cannot claim your funds just like that. There is a chance that the other party might broadcast an old commitment transaction. Once that happens then you have to come back online before the timelock expires and broadcast a penalty transaction. If you trust the node you are connected to then you can stay offline for as much as you want. You can also set up a watchtower which can automatically publish a penalty transaction for you. Electrum founds channels with a to_self_delay of 1024 blocks (~1 week), so this means that you can be safely offline for slightly less than a week. As for now, this value can be only changed directly in the code. If your node remains online then you're contributing your channel funds to help route other people's transactions. The more channels you have open the more routing you can do also.
As nc50lc has said, channels founded using Electrum cannot be used for payment routing. All channels are private so they are not advertised across the network and cannot be found using Lightning explorers (ex. 1ml.com). |
|
|
|
You can also simply spend some coins over the Lightning Network if you don't want to pay the swap fee. You will gain incoming capacity this way. As far as I've understood this happens so the node that you're connected be able to know how many bitcoins there are left to be received (from your channel)
I am not sure what you mean by that. In short, when you open a channel, you cannot receive any coins through it because the other person does not have any coins on their side of the exactly same channel. As you spend coins through that channel, the balance of the other party increases. Once their balance is higher than the required channel reserve, you can receive coins through that channel. |
|
|
|
I would ask if it is common for posts to get "lost" that might otherwise get responded to because there are too many other posts?
I guess it happened a few times, but I think it's more common for the LN related threads to be scattered across various boards. Here's a list that I put together: 2021Bitcoin Discussion: 1, 2, 3, 4Development & Technical Discussion: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Wallet Software: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Electrum: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Bitcoin Technical Support: 1, 2, 3Beginners & Help: 12020Bitcoin Discussion: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Development & Technical Discussion: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Electrum: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Wallet Software: 1, 2, 3Bitcoin Technical Support: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Beginners & Help: 1, 2, 3Altcoin Discussion: 1What about the Mycelium section then? There doesn't seem to be much activity and yet it exists. Was there any particular reason why it was created? |
|
|
|
If you are deleting my reply, then you should delete JayJuanGee also.
Unless you and him are working together.
I am not going to tolerate any direct insults in this topic. That's why I deleted your reply. Most of the replies that I have deleted so far were some copy/paste garbage or advertisements. I don't mind having some off-topic conversation here since everyone treats this topic as a place to post any Lightning related content rather than suggestions of changes to the first post. As long as it doesn't turn out to be another "Is Lightning good or bad" discussion for more than 2 pages with arguments that already have been addressed then I am fine with anything. Feel free to respond to my reply in some other thread if you have any further comments. Edit: If anyone is curious, we have managed to sort everything out via PM. |
|
|
|
I still think 90% of the posts will be from " Mr Millisats" himself, but if you want to contend with that freakshow, then on your head be it. franky1 already got banned from the "Development & Technical Discussion" section, so I guess it would be only a matter of time in the Lightning/2nd layer board. |
|
|
|
I just had a look for the thread asking for a LN sub forum to be created, but I just can't find it at the moment. It would save the hassle of responding to dense questions for people who have no intentions of using the Lightning Network at all.
As far as I remember, at least three such threads were created. This one is the latest one. The average person is unlikely to engage with Liquid directly. It seems to be oriented more towards businesses.
That's what I initially wanted to mention in my post earlier today. Most of the documentation determines Liquid Network as a solution targeted at the trading market rather than individual users. |
|
|
|
Then what in your opinion is the difference
between Lightning Network and Liquid Network?
Liquid Network is fundamentally different from the Lightning Network. Liquid Network cannot work without third-party. You can exchange BTC to L-BTC on your own, but you won't be able to convert it back without Liquid Federation member's help. Liquid Network transactions are not instantaneous. Every minute, a new block is generated by one of the Functionaries and signed by the majority of other Functionaries. Functionaries are selected among the members of the Liquid Federation. The Lightning Network on the other hand, does not suffer from many of the Liquid Network's problems. All you need to open and close a channel is a simple on-chain transaction. Funds are held in a 2-of-2 multisig address unlike Liquid Network where funds are stored in a 11-of-15 multisig address controlled by Liquid Network's Watchmen. The number of required confirmations before a channel becomes active is fully customizable while Liquid Network requires 102 confirmations before L-BTC is credited. As for the Lightning transactions, HTLCs are used for trustless payment settlement. Every time a balance of the channel is updated, a new commitment transaction is signed to ensure that the current channel balance can be enforced on-chain. When that happens, sub-satoshi values are rounded down and outputs below the dust limit are added to the transaction fee. As of right now, subsatoshis are negligible values, which in my opinion can be discarded. It won't be a problem anymore if some day there is a hard-fork changing the maximum number of decimal places. I think there are only two situations when some trust is involved. The first one is when you have milisatoshis and you really care about them. As long as the channel is open, you can spend them. The other one is when your node goes offline for some reason which means that the other party can broadcast an old commitment transaction. You can freely set the amount of time which the other party must wait before the transaction can be included in a block after it was broadcast. Most nodes will accept timelocks up to 2046 blocks (~2 weeks), so it shouldn't be really a problem. I could mention watchtowers here, but they are obviously a third-party. Having said all of that, I believe that the Lightning Network cannot be called a third-party off-chain system, especially if you compare it to Liquid Network. Why is the Liquid network FAQ topic not included?
I don't recall ever seeing such a thread. That could be one of the reasons why it is not in this section. A separate board for second layer software would be probably the best solution. |
|
|
|
If you're using the default kind of seed phrase, or you don't remember tinkering with that setting, then you have an Electrum seed phrase and you can't directly import it into another wallet unless it also lets you set he address derivation path.
You can import an Electrum seed into BlueWallet as long as at least one of the addresses derived from it received some coins. |
|
|
|
Besides the fee rate, there should also be a base fee. What's the base rate of each transaction charged by Phoenix wallet?
There is no reason why you could not set the base fee to zero. I am not sure if that's the case here, though. Edit: Sending LN payments: as low as 1 sat + 0.01% of the amount sent. If no route can be found for this price, the fees will increase gradually up to a maximum of 12 sats + 0.3%. |
|
|
|
Parę dni temu pojawiła się nowa aktualizacja Electrum. Najważniejszą zmianą dotyczącą Lightning Network jest m.in. wprowadzenie "multi-part payments", dzięki którym szanse na powodzenie transakcji znacznie wzrastają, zwłaszcza przy większej liczbie otwartych kanałów. nie bez powodu od początku Lightnining Network było tak bardzo krytykowane, wielu ludzi wiedziało od początku, że to nie zadziała.
Wielu z tych ludzi zapewne popierało Bitcoin Cash jako jedyną słuszną ścieżkę rozwoju Bitcoina. |
|
|
|
A new update of Electrum was released two days ago. It has brought quite a few improvements to the Lightning implementation. * Lightning:
- recoverable channels (see below)
- trampoline payments (see below)
- support multi-part-payment
- support upfront-shutdown-script The changelog explains each new feature quite well, so there is no point in explaining it here again. I will try to update the guide to match the changes by the end of the week. Also, submarine swaps are now available on Android devices. Edit: It looks like multi-part payments are not explained in the changelog. Basically, any payment can be split into smaller chunks and sent through different channels. This can drastically decrease the failure rate of transactions as well as make some of them cheaper (see this post). |
|
|
|
i am planning to buy a Trezor? is it now possible to use the Desktop suite for labeling?
Yes. As long as you use Trezor Suite, you can keep the label data locally. You can also use Google Drive if you trust them more for some reason. All the metadata is automatically encrypted with your private key. |
|
|
|
1) The entire system of the LN is based on the node's judgment, as far as I've understood. If both parties remain cooperative, including the node, then they'll successfully transact their money. If one of them becomes uncooperative, then the other party can force-close the channel and both parties will receive their analogous funds. But what happens if the node stops being cooperative? For example, if it stops being online. Isn't the node the one that keeps the channel "alive"? Without it, do both parties own their funds? Can they broadcast the final result to the blockchain?
If one of the nodes goes offline then the channel becomes inactive. It cannot be used for sending and routing payments in such a state. The other party can either wait for its peer to come back online or close the channel forcefully by broadcasting (the latest) commitment transaction. A new commitment transaction is signed every time the channel is updated and at the same time both parties are supposed to share their preimage which allows the other party to revoke the previous commitment transaction and publish a penalty transaction in case the old commitment transaction is ever broadcast. A commitment transaction records the current state of the channel. 2) What is the difference between "Close Channel" and "Force-Close Channel"? I don't get it. Is the first one executed by the node and the second one means "uncooperative broadcasting to the blockchain"?
"Force-Close Channel" can be initiated at any time. Although, it doesn't make much sense to use it when the other party is cooperative because you have to wait a certain amount of time before your transaction is accepted by Bitcoin nodes. Usually, such a timelock is equal to 144 blocks (~1 day) 3) Why do we need LN invoices? Couldn't this work with bitcoin addresses? The first party would simply request money on one of his/her addresses and the second one would select an output to spend.
LN invoices contain some useful information, including a hashed "payment preimage" (see this). Actually, it is possible to send payments over the Lightning Network without a valid invoice thanks to keysend. As far as I remember, this feature is still not enabled by default in any implementation, so hardly any nodes use it. Also, the status of the channels is changing dynamically, an invoice is temporary, it can be quickly invalid, because it depends on having sufficient liquidity on each side.
An invoice does not contain any information about the receiver's liquidity. You can generate an invoice even if you have never spent any coins over the Lightning Network. If you put 1 BTC in some LN channel, then you can receive up to 1 BTC.
It would be actually slightly less than that. Keep in mind that both parties need to maintain a channel reserve (1-3% of the channel's capacity). On my electrum, once I opened a channel and locked all of my testnet bitcoins to a multi-signature address, it showed me that I could send up to 10 mBTC, but 0 mBTC to receive.
That sounds about right. When you open a channel, all the funds are on your side of the channel. You won't be able to receive any coins unless you make room for them. Specifically, I'll have to "swap" coins in order to increase my receiving capacity. This is what I don't get. The money are on the multi-signature address and node can confirm that. Why do we differentiate "sending funds" and "receiving funds" since they're both "funds" on the same address?
You don't have to swap those coins specifically. You can simply spend those coins and you should gain incoming liquidity this way. As for the person that pays the channel, don't they both pay it? They both open a channel on the same node, and thus they both create an on-chain transaction locking funds on a multi-signature address.
As of right now, the person who initiates the channel is considered as its founder, and the founder always pays the closing transaction fee. |
|
|
|
But does the battery bother anyone since these can't last more than a few years right? Has anyone battery went bad with the nano ledger x?
My Nano X arrived with a faulty battery twice (it was discharging way too fast). I had both units replaced under warranty. Ledger claims that the battery is not replaceable. You should be able to use it without any problems even if the battery dies. I dont want to spend over two hundred dollars on the trezor T though... so would just getting the trezor one be fine since its around same price as the ledger s? For me, i am strongly leaning towards getting another nano ledger s or the trezor one.
Keep in mind that both Trezor model One and model T are vulnerable to the unfixable seed extraction attack. I guess that's something you would want to know about. |
|
|
|
|
I would appreciate if you could move your "LN is (not) Bitcoin" discussion to a different thread. Feel free to share your concerns about the liquidity here, though.
|
|
|
|
If i do get a second hardware wallet, my plan is to do the 25th word seed on it. Thus like do it... but i dont want to try it on my current one.
Why? There is no risk involved. You will still be able to access your passphrase-less wallet without any problems. When you set up a passphrase, you have two choices. You can either enter it manually every time you plug in your device or you can attach it to a separate PIN. So, if you enter your current PIN, you will be able to access your current wallet. Or would the same thing be accomplished if i just get the new nano ledger s wallet and just input my current seed to it? But when i do this, I would need to set up a new pin for it right? So once i do that, what would happen if i unplug the new nano ledger s from the laptop and then connect my current nano ledger s to it? Once i type in my pin and log in... then it would show the same balance right and not 0?
You can even use the same PIN if you want. You should be able to use both devices with Ledger Live without any extra configuration. So its like wouldnt it be less safe if you have the nano ledger x with you since transfer could be done without a computer?
You need either a phone or a computer to transfer your coins. You can disable Bluetooth connectivity in the settings and use only a wired connection if you are concerned about that for some reason. Like what if imagine you try to type your seed into a hardware wallet at the same time in say two different hardware wallets? What happens then? It would show the same balance for both people? Imagine you tried do type you seed in two different hardware wallets at same time? I assume it just same balance right and nothing happens till you try to transfer coins from it to another?
If you input the same recovery seed into two hardware wallets then you should see exactly the same balance on both devices. You don't need to transfer your coins. |
|
|
|
Im not familiar with Electrum and not happy about having the walet store the coins outside of Trezor even if you supposedly can't get to the keys without the Trezor hooked up.
You are not storing anything outside your Trezor. Your private keys are not supposed to leave your device. Electrum and any other compatible altcoin wallet act only as an interface which knows how to communicate with your hardware wallet. There is no risk as long as you verify what's being displayed on your Trezor's screen and you don't enter your recovery seed anywhere. You seem to think that if you use Electrum-RVN, it will store the private keys. That's wrong. You won't be able to spend any coins unless you attach and unlock your Trezor device. I still thinking that having to have a 2-step process of managing an Electrum and Trezor together seems more complicated than just doing it on the Trezor directly.
You don't have to use both at the same time. There are quite a few people here who use their hardware wallets only with Electrum since it supports many advanced features. As for the Ravencoin, you can use Trezor Suite or their web interface for Bitcoin and, for example, Electrum-RVN for Ravencoin without any problems. Will Trezor be fixing this in upcoming hardware and if so, do I have to buy another Trezor to get that to work when the finally get it working?
There is no reason why new hardware would be needed. It is purely a software limitation. Trezor developers are busy making Trezor Suite more usable, so I wouldn't expect them to add a native support for the specific altcoin you use. Every piece of software used by Trezor is open-source, so the community is free to contribute as well. Also, if they supported every single altcoin natively, they would need to have a solid backend which is costly. |
|
|
|
I am using Electrum app on android
You can cancel that transaction by replacing it with a new transaction spending the same inputs to one of your addresses with a higher fee. I am not sure if there is an easy way to do that on the Android version. The Android version lacks some features in comparison to the desktop one, so you might need to download it if you don't find "Cancel transaction' option. You could restore your wallet using your recovery phrase on your desktop and simply right-click on your transaction, and select "Cancel transaction". Electrum will automatically double-spend your transaction with a higher fee. If you decide to download the desktop version of Electrum, please, read this thread before installing it. |
|
|
|
Manager: yahoo62278Nazwa kampanii: Betnomi Sig and avatar campaignIle do zarobienia/tydzień / ilość postów: Member - $25 w BTC/tydzień, Full Member - $40 w BTC/tydzień, Senior Member - $55 w BTC/tydzień, Hero Member - $75 w BTC/tydzień, Legendary - $90 w BTC/tydzień Jakie rangi: 40x Member - Legendary Dodatkowe informacje: Minimum 25 postów tygodniowo, w tym minimum 5 postów w sekcji "Gambling". Lokale nie liczą się. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
