From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B4EC0010 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:46:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE8EF403A8 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:46:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.298 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uk9aPTEfbgh7 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:46:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-4319.protonmail.ch (mail-4319.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.19]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 785F8403A4 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:46:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:46:36 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1628642806; bh=bWNHuD+TFNEqfJounqoRND9tT/yWgnBNVAzJbMK7iuA=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=qPS95giXwm994DhO8jyiZ6qH7/HnuurnW4Ow9p8YZ99e17gdlOsK6O5wGxpVZ7AcX TIn+ZygF8YntLv65j1XN/s1ckaXmrlMM2rSyYshtxALFEadCEtfoxgptiHz5+DdJIa a89576GLLNCXrGJzdZaehCSKFUlU8zDSMfWFsps4= To: Antoine Riard , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion From: ZmnSCPxj Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20210810061441.6rg3quotiycomcp6@ganymede> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: lightning-dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] Removing the Dust Limit X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:46:54 -0000 Good morning all, Thinking a little more, if the dust limit is intended to help keep UTXO set= s down, then on the LN side, this could be achieved as well by using channe= l factories (including "one-shot" factories which do not allow changing the= topology of the subgraph inside the factory, but have the advantage of not= requiring either `SIGHASH_NOINPUT` or an extra CSV constraint that is diff= icult to weigh in routing algorithms), where multiple channels are backed b= y a single UTXO. Of course, with channel factories there is now a greater set of participant= s who will have differing opinions on appropriate feerate. So I suppose one can argue that the dust limit becomes less material to hig= her layers, than actual onchain feerates. Regards, ZmnSCPxj