rich1.0Subhra Mazumdar [ARCHIVE] (npub1sn…g9vl0)https://yabu.me/npub1snw7t4auupm70ntyeywuzqn80cf6es53ym8rlzymh8ft97qmyq9qrg9vl0njumphttps://yabu.me📅 Original date posted:2020-03-06 📝 Original message: Hi, I was reading the paper by Poon and Dryja on Bitcoin Lightning Network and was going through the construction of HTLC. Suppose 2 parties A and B have a channel with each party locking 0.5 BTC. Suppose A wants to transfer 0.1 BTC to B contingent to the knowledge of R : H=h(R) produced within a locktime of say t days. So the script output for A is - 1. 0.4 BTC to A 2. 0.5 BTC to B 3. 0.1 BTC locked in HTLC between A & B. Why we cannot set the terms as say 0.4 BTC to A, 0.2 BTC to B and 0.4 BTC to HTLC, where HTLC output can follow either of the paths - If B produces R within t days then it gets back 0.4 BTC else after t days A can broadcast with 0.4 BTC going to the A? This prevents B from not responding (and induce possibly griefing attack across a longer path by withholding the solution) since it will lose out 0.3 BTC. What can be the problem if the terms of HTLC itself tries to enforce a penalty on the counterparty? -- Yours sincerely, Subhra Mazumdar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20200306/6350cd37/attachment.html>