Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: [self-moderated] Is LN Bitcoin? franky1: About scaling, on-chain and off-chain
by
franky1
on 14/01/2022, 23:57:08 UTC
again.. i am talking about the LN payments
EMPHASIS LN PAYMENTS

which allow eric to get paid from alice.

you just tried to convert a conversation about LN payments and their HTLC

to then quote yourself saying
Quote
When you open a channel, you share your htlc_basepoint, which is a compressed public key used only for HTLC payments in this particular channel. The other node shares their htlc_basepoint as well.
opening a channel has NOTHING to do with ln payments.

also dragging another bit of facepalm from another post
Did you read the other half of my post? Eric also needs two valid HTLC signatures that can be produced only by Alice and Bob.
first let me clarify buzzwords
(LN payment = invoice, aka onion_route_packet aka msat micropayment channel, aka millisat denominated HTLC)
you choose the buzzword. your LN has many for the same thing.
just dont confuse LN payment(or its buzzword variations for the same thing) vs comitments(blockchain accepted format)

ERIC DOES NOT get paid using two valid HTLC signatures produced by only alice and bob.
ERIC DOES NOT get paid using two signatures produces by signing the commitment as the 'message'
ERIC gets paid by Diana and only diana

eric never sees alice bob pubkeys..
alice and bob never put erics payment hash into a commitment

because eric has the secret

..
i know your locked on and zoned in and narrow scoped concentrating on just 'direct payment' scenarios of a hub model payment were its just alice paying bob. where bob is the destination. whereby in that 2016-7 scenario of explanation of bolt 2 is only describing the in channel management of such direct payment of just alice and bob.

but can you just take a few hours away from typing your messages on repeat referring only to yourself as evidence of your thoughts. and instead read the other bolts and do this..
this one thing

distinguish the difference between direct paying bob. vs route payment to eric
by this try to expand your scope beyond the repetitive bolt2 reference of a direct payment scenario of a 'hub model'. and instead grasp the concept of micropayments of a 'hop model'

i know you are endlessly trying to desperately only want to talk about commitments. but grasp that LN msat payments are a thing, stop skipping to point 4 of your ascii image to avoid the 123

grasp things like:
if bob charges 1sat fee, carol charges 1sat fee, diana charges 1 sat fee
thats 3sat to make a payment to eric, alice needs to know this to then set how much to send to bob.

alice cant commit to bob with an amount unless a route has first been tried using the msat denominated payments, where by alice learns what the combined fees of that route will be.

alice also might be looking at other routes. and not yet decided which route to use as a path

i know you want to skip past the payment talk to meander back to commitment.
but untill you can understand the process of the payment talk. and what happens before a commitment is even made.

then it just shows you dont know about the payments.
and its not because they dont exist. its that your stuck (narrow scope view) only on the channel direct payment to partner

before hitting reply.
1. if you have not read the other bolts. dont bother replying, you have already spammed this topic just referencing yourself in previous posts of your opinion. there is no need to post again referencing yourself.

2. if you have sat back and took some time to wish to discuss LN routed payments (without meandering into examples of inchannel direct commitments) then have the first part of your post quoting my previous post questions. putting a * into the [ ] that applies to your opinion.

then we can establish a baseline of opinon. of where your opinion differs or (dare i say it) agree with mine
i want to get a short quick summary of your actual uncontradicted opinion of your thoughts of LN. so that i can see what things your not getting