You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The daemon abstract settlement into one logical message (whose size might be in excess of the BOLT limitation) but the logical message would be fragmented into multiple over-the-wire chunks which conform to the BOLT maximum?
This design would mimic TCP fragmenting
Solution
MVP Solution: Place limitations on in-flight HTLCs
Long term solution: Fragment messages akin to TCP fragmenting
Limiting UTXOs in Funding Output:
Reason: Ensure conformance with message-size limits on protocol level
Cause:
- Each HTLC may reference multiple asset UTXOs from funding output
- Each referenced input needs a signature, increasing transmission data
Alternative Solutions:
- Implement SIGHASH_NOINPUT on protocol layer
- Allows sending second-level signatures alongside HTLCs
- Requires stable pkScript for next commitment (achieved with per-commitment-secret)
- Limit total number of UTXOs within funding output
- Asset ID is not the limiting factor, but rather total UTXO count
dstadulis
changed the title
Ensure transaction transmissibility due to HTLC signature-creation requirements by limiting transaction's asset UTXO input count
Ensure HTLC signature transport demands conform to BOLT wire-message size limitations
Oct 29, 2024
Solution Space
The daemon abstract settlement into one logical message (whose size might be in excess of the BOLT limitation) but the logical message would be fragmented into multiple over-the-wire chunks which conform to the BOLT maximum?
This design would mimic TCP fragmenting
Solution
Limiting UTXOs in Funding Output:
Reason: Ensure conformance with message-size limits on protocol level
Cause:
- Each HTLC may reference multiple asset UTXOs from funding output
- Each referenced input needs a signature, increasing transmission data
Alternative Solutions:
- Implement SIGHASH_NOINPUT on protocol layer
- Allows sending second-level signatures alongside HTLCs
- Requires stable pkScript for next commitment (achieved with per-commitment-secret)
- Limit total number of UTXOs within funding output
- Asset ID is not the limiting factor, but rather total UTXO count
[Original commentary]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: