The Lightning Network FAQ

[dkbit98]

US dollars or Stablesats are apparently coming to Lightning Network via Galoy Inc that created LN wallet used in El Salvador Bitcoin Beach project.
This means that we could hold, send and receive USD (backed by Bitcoin) along with Bitcoin in out wallets and use it for everyday payments.
There is no USD token like in the case of Tether, USDC and other stable coins, it's just bitcoin stabilized into dollar balance using inverse perpetual swaps.

First problem I see here is that centralized exchange OKX will be used for derivatives contracts used to hedge Bitcoin.
This means that funds could be frozen, and you are not really in custody of your coins in the moment when trade happens.
Second biggest risk is auto-deleveraging that could result in liquidations in volatile market conditions.

Short video explanation how Stablesats works:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGO4dbwMYwg

I am not really thrilled with this news, and I think Bitcoin will outlive US dollar and other fiat currencies that are going down the hill with inflation.
Maybe this could be used as a tool in some cases, and fees are lowest compared to all other alternatives, but I would be very careful using it with LN.



Sources with more information:
https://galoy.io/announcing-stablesats-bringing-usd-to-the-lightning-network/
https://stablesats.com/

[1714041444]

1714041444

[1714041444]

1714041444

[n0nce]

US dollars or Stablesats are apparently coming to Lightning Network via Galoy Inc that created LN wallet used in El Salvador Bitcoin Beach project.
[~snip~]

I replied to this news in the Lightning Network observer. I'm not thrilled, either..

As the article states, if a lot of people buy e.g. 1BTC worth of stablesats and Bitcoin loses half its value, the company will have to give each such user 1BTC, and the users would be able to cash out 2BTC, right?
In a longer bear market, it will absolutely wreck the company if they don't have enough reserves.

Seeing that they are looking for money in the single-digit-millions-range, it doesn't appear to me that they have sufficient reserves.
Maybe they are working with centralized exchanges in a way that is often suspected already to be happening: those 1BTC I mentioned earlier, will be 'printed' out of thin air at the exchange, in hope that not all users withdraw to non-custodial wallets at the same time.

I'd personally steer clear from something like this.

[~snip~]
You guys have any thoughts on this or want to make a similar experience and share results?
Like, I have a loop and its route is not found/selected to route any payments! This is kinda disappointing!

I'm sorry; I don't have a loop right now to try with. Indeed it sounds pretty disappointing. Have you tried 'forcing' it over less hops? It's possible that your directly connected node E is fine, but that the next hop has trash liquidity. Or the one after that. Maybe try routing through just E or just D -> E -> A. Add hops until it no longer works.

[Cricktor]

Let's call nodes A, B, C, D and E, where D is my node. So, my goal would be to get a route from D -> E -> A -> B -> C. This loop was opened with 1million sats.
So, I used the following command to try to get the route:

Code:

lightning-cli -k getroute id=node_C fromid=node_E msatoshi=700000000msat riskfactor=0

Usually such circles are used for rebalancing your own node, so you send a payment from your node D to yourself, again D, AFAIR.

But anyway just to find a route to a certain destination within the circle it doesn't matter, what I don't understand is why you use fromid=node_E and not node_D, as you want your own node as origin of the payment.

[darkv0rt3x]

Let's call nodes A, B, C, D and E, where D is my node. So, my goal would be to get a route from D -> E -> A -> B -> C. This loop was opened with 1million sats.
So, I used the following command to try to get the route:

Code:

lightning-cli -k getroute id=node_C fromid=node_E msatoshi=700000000msat riskfactor=0

Usually such circles are used for rebalancing your own node, so you send a payment from your node D to yourself, again D, AFAIR.

But anyway just to find a route to a certain destination within the circle it doesn't matter, what I don't understand is why you use fromid=node_E and not node_D, as you want your own node as origin of the payment.

That was a question I was asking myself. I don't know if the command itself already considers my node as the source node or not. I mean, I assume it does, because otherwise it wouldn't make sense to try to get a route, running the command in my node but asking to get a route starting from some other node. Maybe I'm missing some scenario, but yeah, I assumed the command considers my node as the starting point! That's why I used fromid to try to force the route through the node I have a channel to, in this loop! Otherwise, any other node could be selected and the chance of using the loop I'm in, would be probably greatly reduced!

[n0nce]

Let's call nodes A, B, C, D and E, where D is my node. So, my goal would be to get a route from D -> E -> A -> B -> C. This loop was opened with 1million sats.
So, I used the following command to try to get the route:

Code:

lightning-cli -k getroute id=node_C fromid=node_E msatoshi=700000000msat riskfactor=0

Usually such circles are used for rebalancing your own node, so you send a payment from your node D to yourself, again D, AFAIR.

But anyway just to find a route to a certain destination within the circle it doesn't matter, what I don't understand is why you use fromid=node_E and not node_D, as you want your own node as origin of the payment.

That was a question I was asking myself. I don't know if the command itself already considers my node as the source node or not. I mean, I assume it does, because otherwise it wouldn't make sense to try to get a route, running the command in my node but asking to get a route starting from some other node. Maybe I'm missing some scenario, but yeah, I assumed the command considers my node as the starting point! That's why I used fromid to try to force the route through the node I have a channel to, in this loop! Otherwise, any other node could be selected and the chance of using the loop I'm in, would be probably greatly reduced!

Your question is answered quickly by the documentation..

fromid is the node to start the route from: default is this node.

In theory, using the normal sendpay command, you can pass a route argument instead of having it find a route automatically using getroute.
https://lightning.readthedocs.io/lightning-sendpay.7.html?highlight=sendpay

You would probably need to generate a route using getroute and then modify it manually, before passing it to sendpay.

On success, an object containing route is returned. It is an array of objects, where each object contains:

• id (pubkey): The node at the end of this hop
• channel (short_channel_id): The channel joining these nodes
• direction (u32): 0 if this channel is traversed from lesser to greater id, otherwise 1
• amount_msat (msat): The amount expected by the node at the end of this hop
• delay (u32): The total CLTV expected by the node at the end of this hop
• style (string): The features understood by the destination node (always “tlv”)

[darkv0rt3x]

Let's call nodes A, B, C, D and E, where D is my node. So, my goal would be to get a route from D -> E -> A -> B -> C. This loop was opened with 1million sats.
So, I used the following command to try to get the route:

Code:

lightning-cli -k getroute id=node_C fromid=node_E msatoshi=700000000msat riskfactor=0

Usually such circles are used for rebalancing your own node, so you send a payment from your node D to yourself, again D, AFAIR.

But anyway just to find a route to a certain destination within the circle it doesn't matter, what I don't understand is why you use fromid=node_E and not node_D, as you want your own node as origin of the payment.

That was a question I was asking myself. I don't know if the command itself already considers my node as the source node or not. I mean, I assume it does, because otherwise it wouldn't make sense to try to get a route, running the command in my node but asking to get a route starting from some other node. Maybe I'm missing some scenario, but yeah, I assumed the command considers my node as the starting point! That's why I used fromid to try to force the route through the node I have a channel to, in this loop! Otherwise, any other node could be selected and the chance of using the loop I'm in, would be probably greatly reduced!

Your question is answered quickly by the documentation..

fromid is the node to start the route from: default is this node.

In theory, using the normal sendpay command, you can pass a route argument instead of having it find a route automatically using getroute.
https://lightning.readthedocs.io/lightning-sendpay.7.html?highlight=sendpay

You would probably need to generate a route using getroute and then modify it manually, before passing it to sendpay.

On success, an object containing route is returned. It is an array of objects, where each object contains:

• id (pubkey): The node at the end of this hop
• channel (short_channel_id): The channel joining these nodes
• direction (u32): 0 if this channel is traversed from lesser to greater id, otherwise 1
• amount_msat (msat): The amount expected by the node at the end of this hop
• delay (u32): The total CLTV expected by the node at the end of this hop
• style (string): The features understood by the destination node (always “tlv”)

In this case I didn't want to send any payment, only to test the routing algorithm to see if it would "naturally" select the loop we have!
About the ocumentatiom, yeah, you're right! I read it, but somehow I overlooked that part where it says the default was "this node"!

[n0nce]

In this case I didn't want to send any payment, only to test the routing algorithm to see if it would "naturally" select the loop we have!
About the documentation, yeah, you're right! I read it, but somehow I overlooked that part where it says the default was "this node"!

Okay well, yes, for testing what routes it would 'naturally' take, getroute is exactly what you want to use.
Unfortunately, I don't think you can force a 'next hop' - but maybe Rath_ knows more about this.

[darkv0rt3x]

In this case I didn't want to send any payment, only to test the routing algorithm to see if it would "naturally" select the loop we have!
About the documentation, yeah, you're right! I read it, but somehow I overlooked that part where it says the default was "this node"!

Okay well, yes, for testing what routes it would 'naturally' take, getroute is exactly what you want to use.
Unfortunately, I don't think you can force a 'next hop' - but maybe Rath_ knows more about this.

I think there is a way, with Core Lightning, to build (maybe) a json array with the peers you want to use but seems that you also have to include other info about the peer in that json array so that it work. But I'm not even sure what would be the command to use to accomplish this. Maybe keysend or sendpay. Didn't look to the docs, tbh!

[n0nce]

In this case I didn't want to send any payment, only to test the routing algorithm to see if it would "naturally" select the loop we have!
About the documentation, yeah, you're right! I read it, but somehow I overlooked that part where it says the default was "this node"!

Okay well, yes, for testing what routes it would 'naturally' take, getroute is exactly what you want to use.
Unfortunately, I don't think you can force a 'next hop' - but maybe Rath_ knows more about this.

I think there is a way, with Core Lightning, to build (maybe) a json array with the peers you want to use but seems that you also have to include other info about the peer in that json array so that it work. But I'm not even sure what would be the command to use to accomplish this. Maybe keysend or sendpay. Didn't look to the docs, tbh!

You can give a json array with the whole path to the two *send* commands; at least, I checked for sendpay.
But can you give an array with a few peers (or one) you absolutely want to use, and let it build a path from there? I don't think that's possible.

There are routing hints, but that's something else entirely; it's part of the invoice and helps the sender find a route. It could be abused for your use-case though, if you were to create an invoice from another node that includes all (or some) of the nodes on your loop as routing hints.

[CryptKeeper]

Today’s LightningNetwork⚡️capacity in Bitcoin (August 10, 2022)

[BitGoba]

Today capacity
4570 BTC

https://1ml.com/

[JayJuanGee]

I've been meaning to do a larger write up of my experience once I hit 1M sats in fees.

I run the node Prince, https://1ml.com/node/02644f80b5d32ed9a9888690571159692a17d7ead7db2df5124a8e2a72a8447d30

I am currently ranked 8th on the BOS rankings (https://fulmo.org/bos-score.html) and 12th on lightning terminal rankings. I have 8-9 BTC on my node with about 110 channels (I have more incoming that outcoming liquidity, so that 8BTC is not my investment).

Top line numbers: Over the past 5 months have routed over 6700 payments worth over 1.7 billion sats earning me about 900k sats in routing fees; I've spent about 100k sats in on-chain fees and rebalancing fees. For those doing the math, that comes out to about 0.5% APR on my locked-up capital. Although my volume is steadily increasing and I may be able to get closer to 1% in the next year.

I have everything automated including fees and re-balancing.
-- I use lnd-charge for fees: https://github.com/accumulator/charge-lnd
-- I use c-otto's script for automatic re-balancing: https://c-otto.de/

Happy to answer more questions -- oh, and feel free to open a channel to me. The best way to get started is to open liquidity triangles with people (ie A->B; B->C; C->A). Happy to be a part of a couple here if there is interest. I do require a minimum of 5M sats for any incoming channels.

Nice first post in this thread Abul basar 365.  Hopefully some members who are more experienced with lighting network can have some back and forth with you in this thread to verify that your proclaimed activities are legitimate..   Just based on your having had provided links and made a decent write up, I was going to send more smerits, but then I saw that your first several posts on the forum relate to bounty hunting and I am disinclined to send smerits to members who are heavily involved in bounty hunting activities unless they also provide good substantively helpful posts in other parts of the forum.. so hopefully you will continue to contribute in order that some of the members here can have some interactions back and forth with you and I would like to see you verified that your bitcoin related activities are legit and the information that you are providing is helpful to other members.  

I would appreciate if any forum member experienced with lightning network matters could vet the information provided by Abul basar 365.

By the way, in regards to the BOS ranking score, I am not clear about how to read that.  It appears to me that the first 12 nodes are tied for 1st, or am I reading that wrong?  I do understand that the scoring and the rankings will regularly change, yet I cannot see where you got 8th out of 12?  Another thing, I suppose you could say would be that you are 12th, or you could say that you are merely amongst a group of 12 other nodes that are tied for 1st (with the same "highest" score)?... Something is confusing to me about how to characterize/describe the BOS ranking location and how you mentioned 8th from that?

[Rath_]

-snip

Hopefully some members who are more experienced with lighting network can have some back and forth with you in this thread to verify that your proclaimed activities are legitimate..

Unfortunately, that post is a copy/paste. Here's the original post made by a different member who also answered our questions.

[JayJuanGee]

-snip

Hopefully some members who are more experienced with lighting network can have some back and forth with you in this thread to verify that your proclaimed activities are legitimate..

Unfortunately, that post is a copy/paste. Here's the original post made by a different member who also answered our questions.

Whoops... I feel like such a dumbie..

I hit the report Abul basar 365 for plagiarism button, since we know that it is just wrong to copy and paste and to present the content of others (in this case, TheJuice) as if it were your own.. but also he should not be able to benefit from his having had received merits for that post in terms of going back to bounty hunting or for whatever other reasons he might have had for faking his situation.

Thanks for pointing that out Rath_...

[Rath_]

c-lightning v0.12.0 was released a couple of days ago. Static channel backup is now available! Keep in mind that it should be your last resort. If your peers refuse to cooperate or go offline permanently, you might not be able to recover your coins. Using the backup plugin should be your main strategy as it is more reliable and lets you keep your channels operational after successful recovery.

[n0nce]

c-lightning v0.12.0 was released a couple of days ago. Static channel backup is now available! Keep in mind that it should be your last resort. If your peers refuse to cooperate or go offline permanently, you might not be able to recover your coins. Using the backup plugin should be your main strategy as it is more reliable and lets you keep your channels operational after successful recovery.

What about using the built-in channel state backup functionality since v0.10.2 instead of the backup plugin?
It is easier to set up and only downside is no PostgreSQL backend support.

Code:

wallet=sqlite3:///home/bitcoin/.lightning/bitcoin/lightningd.sqlite3:/mnt/share/lnbackup/lightningd.sqlite3

[dkbit98]

Mempool website added beta support for Lightning Network and you can find there lot's of useful information and pie charts.
First thing you see is that most LN clear nodes are running on Cloud servers (Google cloud, Amazon cloud, Data Web Global Group, Digital Ocean, Hetzner, etc).
However, around %80 of LN nodes are not shown here because they run on TOR, but 70% of liquidity and capacity is still coming from four biggest cloud servers with clear nodes.
Clearnet capacity is 4,187 BTC; Tor capacity is 367.76 BTC; and rest of capacity is from unknown.
This is clear centralization and I really don't understand what's the problem of running your node on raspberry pi or old laptop/computer... probably it's more convenient and cheaper to use someone else computer  

What do you think about this?


https://mempool.space/lightning


https://mempool.space/graphs/lightning/nodes-per-isp

PS
I heard that Hetzner recently released some announcement saying that using their cloud for any cryptocurrency related services is against their terms, and they will have to ban that soon.
Same thing could happen with all other cloud providers at some point.

[DaveF]

Mempool website added beta support for Lightning Network and you can find there lot's of useful information and pie charts.
First thing you see is that most LN clear nodes are running on Cloud servers (Google cloud, Amazon cloud, Data Web Global Group, Digital Ocean, Hetzner, etc).
However, around %80 of LN nodes are not shown here because they run on TOR, but 70% of liquidity and capacity is still coming from four biggest cloud servers with clear nodes.
Clearnet capacity is 4,187 BTC; Tor capacity is 367.76 BTC; and rest of capacity is from unknown.
This is clear centralization and I really don't understand what's the problem of running your node on raspberry pi or old laptop/computer... probably it's more convenient and cheaper to use someone else computer  

What do you think about this?


https://mempool.space/lightning


https://mempool.space/graphs/lightning/nodes-per-isp

PS
I heard that Hetzner recently released some announcement saying that using their cloud for any cryptocurrency related services is against their terms, and they will have to ban that soon.
Same thing could happen with all other cloud providers at some point.

I *think* a lot of the clear-net stuff that is cloud hosted is from businesses running their nodes.
Their website and back end commerce is already at Amazon cloud or Google Cloud or wherever so that stays there too.

Look at voltage.cloud that we were discussing:

Interesting thing about VoltageCloud is that Alphabet invested a lot of money in their business.

Do you actually think that the nodes they host are going to be anyplace other then the google cloud....

As for most users, running one of the nodes in a box that I love or any pre-packaged LN node it's usually just a click to do TOR, or in the case of Umbrel something you can't unclick. So things like that probably make up a large portion of the TOR nodes. Where people want to do it, but don't want to do it by hand so to speak. Which is fine, I want to drive my car I don't want to know how to refine gas.

-Dave

[dkbit98]

I *think* a lot of the clear-net stuff that is cloud hosted is from businesses running their nodes.
Their website and back end commerce is already at Amazon cloud or Google Cloud or wherever so that stays there too.

This is probably true, but this is making Lightning Network much more centralized than it should be.
If something happens with major cloud providers that would shut down most of the LN nodes and capacity would see drastic reduction.
I know VoltageCloud is actually using googlecloud, and any privacy on LN is also questionable when we know all this.

As for most users, running one of the nodes in a box that I love or any pre-packaged LN node it's usually just a click to do TOR, or in the case of Umbrel something you can't unclick. So things like that probably make up a large portion of the TOR nodes. Where people want to do it, but don't want to do it by hand so to speak. Which is fine, I want to drive my car I don't want to know how to refine gas.

There are now so many options to choose from (myNode, raspiblitz, etc.) and Umbrel is just one of them.

Sorting by capacity isn't really accurate though. If you sort by Node, you'll see better distribution (although Amazon still has 16.64% share).

You can sort them any way you like, but majority of nodes are still on cloud servers.
Centralized exchanges are probably using cloud servers, for example I can see that Kraken exchange has Amazon ISP, Okex exchange uses Alibaba, and Bitfinex is using Google Cloud.

[n0nce]

Sorting by capacity isn't really accurate though. If you sort by Node, you'll see better distribution (although Amazon still has 16.64% share).

You can sort them any way you like, but majority of nodes are still on cloud servers.
Centralized exchanges are probably using cloud servers, for example I can see that Kraken exchange has Amazon ISP, Okex exchange uses Alibaba, and Bitfinex is using Google Cloud.

That's wrong; just the majority of the capacity, not the majority of nodes.
You mostly need more capacity for transferring larger amounts, but high node count and good connectivity of them is much more important to be able to send smaller payments reliably. You know; the kind of payments that unnecessarily clog the blockchain and where even a 1sat/vB fee has a too large proportional impact.