Subnostr

Is not about running a LN implementation or an other. That doesn't help if you jump from using LND to CLN.

In the past I run all of them.

Keep in mind that moving let's say 100 channels from LND to CLN, it will cost you a fortune... for what? For the same threat that some day your new freshly CLN channels will not get force closed by other LND nodes in the path?

Until we will not have a strong consensus between all LN implementations, all these force closures will continue to happen.

We need better rules for force closures on all LN implementations.

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 2y ago

i see, it's a protocol convention that is quite adverse

i think there isn't really a logical reason for force closures

just wait until later, liveness is the big weakness of LN, it's not negotiable by the design of it

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ 2y ago

also, sounds like channel state migration is a sore need too