• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Binance said in a tweet. When capture is completed, Authy will automatically prompt you to name your new account (we’ll soon add a Binance logo, too, so this will be automatic). Do you have more to add here on route boost? Murch, I’m sure you have something to add here, but is that the gist of it? " I’ve always thought of route hints as being used when, if I’m a recipient of a payment and I’m using unannounced or private channels, that I would provide some additional information to a sender so they know how to route to me. Yeah, this actually didn’t work because some senders did not prioritize the channels that were in the route hint. Bastien Teinturier: Yeah, I think I discussed that recently with Christian and I don’t remember exactly why, but he was annoyed because this actually didn’t work. But there’s also this technique that Christian Decker mentioned in his answer to this question on the Stack Exchange, which is route boost, which means that I can also provide some sort of hints about channels that I’m aware of that have adequate capacity for the payment that I wish to receive.

I think it just takes time to - I’m actually reading everything, I’m trying to go click through the next website page every example. So, by requiring a 0 CSV, you do force replaceability even though there is no wait time, because a wait time of 0 means that it can be included in the same block. CSV force the spending transaction to signal BIP125 replaceability? So, having an output that includes the 0 CSV forces replaceability. CSV makes you set an nSequence value that essentially forces the transaction to be considered replaceable. " And I think it’s important to understand here that since both the CSV timelock opcode and BIP125 RBF use the nSequence field for their enforcement, and also due to the potential range values for CSV overlapping with RBF’s range of potential values, it can end up forcing a spending transaction to signal RBF in order to spend a CSV locked output. Mark Erhardt: I think that there might also be a couple of issues here with if you, for example, have one peer that you closely work with and you want to funnel more fees to, you could always route boost them and then make sure that they collect the fees rather than other peers you have, which may be sort of a downside of prioritizing boosted peers.

The information here should not be regarded as financial or investment advice. It is a venture capital investment firm that provides money and business advice to crypto companies. The community has adopted a proposal known as AIP-70, which calls for transferring money from the project’s ecosystem fund to improve the news site. Experts believe that the BlackRock Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) is more likely to get approval from the U.S. So yeah, I do think route boost is more of an interesting historical thing that was tried, but it didn’t really yield any meaningful result in practice, I believe. So, you could sort of ask that people route through specific channels because that one is especially lopsided and it would move the liquidity more in the direction that would balance out the channel, which would be a good thing. And in a way, blinded path makes that easier, because with blinded path, blinded path is a way to doing some route boost without actually telling people about the channels.

So blinded path will be some kind of superior route boost where people can decide on whether they want to use it that way or not. But it’s really the recipient’s decision to whether they want to use it or not. For example, at least in Eclair and in Core Lightning (CLN), whenever you read an invoice and see some route hints in there between a pair of nodes, you use those channels in priority regardless of whether you have other channels to reach that destination between the - to reach that - well, no, I don’t remember. If the new opcode, for example, removed an element of the stack, nodes that followed the new rules per the soft fork, well, in that case hard fork, would have a different stack after executing the opcode than old nodes, because old nodes would not interact with the stack at all. Now, with a 0 CSV, the 0 is left on the stack and 0 is a false-even value. 1ADD, which turns it into a truthy value. So, yeah, it’s just because we can express the number 0 through 16 with a single byte, and that’s why we have 17 native segwit versions defined in, I think it’s BIP141, yeah.