{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","title":"Rusty Russell [ARCHIVE] wrote","author_name":"Rusty Russell [ARCHIVE] (npub1zw…hkhpx)","author_url":"https://yabu.me/npub1zw7cc8z78v6s3grujfvcv3ckpvg6kr0w7nz9yzvwyglyg0qu5sjsqhkhpx","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://yabu.me","html":"📅 Original date posted:2021-06-29\n📝 Original message:\nHi all!\n\n        John Carvalo recently pointed out that not every implementation\naccepts zero-conf channels, but they are useful.  Roasbeef also recently\nnoted that they're not spec'd.\n\nHow do you all do it?  Here's a strawman proposal:\n\n1. Assign a new feature bit \"I accept zeroconf channels\".\n2. If both negotiate this, you can send update_add_htlc (etc) *before*\n   funding_locked without the peer getting upset.\n3. Nodes are advised *not* to forward HTLCs from an unconfirmed channel\n   unless they have explicit reason to trust that node (they can still\n   send *out* that channel, because that's not their problem!).\n\nIt's a pretty simple change, TBH (this zeroconf feature would also\ncreate a new set of channel_types, altering that PR).\n\nI can draft something this week?\n\nThanks!\nRusty."}