I don't want to repeat myself. You will destroy the security of the coin by enabling the hashrate attacker to steal other people's coins. This was not possible before (rather before an attacker could only attempt to double-spend his own coins), thus such an attack was not well funded. You are proposing to fund 51% attacks. I hope you understand that hashrate is rentable and the implications of that.
Sorry your proposal must be scrapped.
Stick with the CLTV on both block chains. That is sound.
I understand hashrate is rentable.
Please explain how a 1BTC value for atomic swap is financing a 51% attack. How many coins can be attacked with 1BTC of hashrate? and realistically how many blocks can be reorged
we are not talking about doing 100BTC swaps as the norm. Most will be 1BTC worth or less
James
Why do you assume only one DE transaction will be ongoing on a block chain simultaneously. And why do you assume that DE transactions will be limited to 1 BTC.