● How will the migration tool from a Bitcoin Core legacy wallet to a descriptor wallet work? ● Core Lightning 0.12.0rc2 is a release candidate for the next major version of this popular LN node implementation. Experienced users are encouraged to help test the software so that any problems can be identified and fixed prior to release. try this web-site can be either through using the same method for keys that were used multiple times (e.g. for Replace-By-Fee) or through simply brute-forcing using the baby-step giant-step or Pollard’s Rho methods. The most likely of these combinations (e.g. a hot wallet key and a third-party security key) is made available for Taproot key-path spending, allowing an output to be spent using a single aggregate signature that looks like any single-sig spend. 23480 updates the output script descriptor language with a rawtr() descriptor for referring to the exposed key in a taproot output in cases where either the key is used without a tweak (not recommended, see BIP341) or when the internal key and scripts aren’t known (which can be unsafe; see the PR comments or the documentation added by this PR for details). Taproot support in the UI is planned for a future update.
I propose some updates, then it’s your time to propose some updates, then it’s my time, so that it’s not as efficient in terms of latency, because if you want to propose an update and it’s not your turn to propose them, you’ll have to wait for a bit. Bastien Teinturier: Yeah, and in a way, blinded path will just allow you to do that again because whenever you choose your blinded path, you can choose to make them go through your friend who wants to collect some fees through exactly the channels where you need them, when you know you have a lot of inbound liquidity and want to balance the channel. But it’s really the recipient’s decision to whether they want to use it or not. DLCs were originally proposed to use a feature of schnorr signatures but were later developed to use more generalized signature adaptors. Developer ZmnSCPxj described a simple way to use ratecards, “you can model a rate card as four separate channels between the same two nodes, with different costs each.
In the base case, combining RBF and a single, static batch carries a simple combination of the complexities that RBF and batching carry discretely. ● New Optech Compatibility Matrix: a new feature on the Optech website shows what wallets and services support certain recommended features, currently opt-in Replace-by-Fee (RBF) and segwit (with more comparisons planned for the future). ● HWI 1.2.1 is a maintenance release that provides compatibility with a recent version of Ledger’s firmware and improves compatibility with the BitBox02. The bug was described as a known issue in the Bitcoin Core 0.18 release notes. Upgrading is “highly recommended” by the Core Lightning developers. The only solutions, besides wallets abandoning message signing support, are for wallet developers to agree on a standard and then widely implement it. The complaint charges that for much of the relevant period, Binance did not require its customers to provide any identity-verifying information before trading on the platform, despite the legal duty that entities like Binance functioning as futures commission merchants (FCMs) collect such information, and failed to implement basic compliance procedures designed to prevent and detect terrorist financing and money laundering. 9. One result of that research is a new standalone library they’ve released, libminisketch, that allows transferring the differences between two sets of information in roughly the byte size of the expected differences themselves.
For P2SH-wrapped segwit P2WPKH, this same information is moved to a witness data field that only consumes 1/4 as many vbytes (27 vbytes) but whose P2SH overhead adds 23 vbytes for a total of 50 vbytes. 2039 adds the ability to get the status of the autopilot functionality as well as allowing enabling or disabling it while the program is running. This PR provides a new rule that allows payments with forwarding fees up to 50 nBTC to go through regardless of their fee percentage and adds an option so that users can customize that value. We’ve spoken previously, over maybe six months a bunch of different times, about different kinds of channel jamming attacks: liquidity jamming attacks, which exhaust the capacities in channels; and HTLC jamming attacks, where the attacker attempts to take all the HTLC slots with a bunch of small payments. We’ve had a few of those discussions over maybe six or nine months, and I’m curious how you all would summarize the jamming discussions from the LN Summit meeting. It makes it hard to debug, it’s something where we had a lot of compatibility bugs over the years, and it created a lot of force close a few years ago because there were compatibility issues when many updates were in flight, and just because that protocol was complex to get right.
