The Lightning Network Is Like The Ship Of Theseus

What is the lightning network? It is generally talked about in comparison, metaphors, or direct interpretations of the purpose.

• “It is the verification account, opposite the series as a savings account.”
• “It is a series of tubes like the Internet, with bitcoin flow through it.”
• “It is a fast -level instant level of bitcoin.”

What really is a network of payment channels, where people close Bitcoin in a multi -neglected address, and update the state of balance distributions outside the chain. This is the way we will expand the Bitcoin range – or at least part of how to expand Bitcoin.

In the short “explanation” series in this magazine, I explain mechanics how Lightning works: How pre -signed transactions that constitute the work of the Lightning channel, how to direct payments over the network, the methods that are managed by liquidity, etc. Read it, and you must have a strong understanding of the basic mechanisms that make the lightning network work.

The problem is, when it comes to the question What The lightning network is that all these individual pieces are normative and replaceable. What if we organize the previously signed transactions? Or what if we use a different mechanism to direct payments over the network? What about completely rethinking about the way we choose the methods of payments in the first place?

What if we all replaced it over time, so that none of the individual parts of the protocol or network are the same? Is the lightning network still? like The Ship of Theos, is a ship that is still the Theosos After each board and the screw was replaced?

Is the lightning network still the lightning network if we change how all individual pieces work?

Channel designs

Lightning channels are groups of pre -signed transactions. The purpose of these transactions is to adhere to the mechanism, give users to enforce them, distribute balance to the common UTXO, which is not controlled by either party.

These channels, or transactions, currently take the Poon-Dryja channel. These transactions use the cancellation key mechanism invented by Tadge Dryja in The original lightning network White paper. This structure of a very specific transaction for the payment channel, but it is not in any way the only structure.

Let’s look at a concept called “Timeout Trees” to consider something with the minimum differences from the way the channels currently operate.

The deadline tree is one of the forms of basic potential channels (a channel with more than two members in it). A Lightning service provider (LSP) creates a tree of one UTXO transactions on the chain, and ends along each branch with the lightning channel between LSP and some users. Each tree has expiration time, after which UTXO can be spent in the chain (or any of those medium between it and lightning channels) by LSP from one side. The idea is that users can simply exchange their money from the channels in the expiration tree to a new one before that point, and allow the LSP to restore the liquidity that was imprisoned with its users after the expiration.

This is proposed as a case of use for Checktemplayify (CTV), an OPCONS code that prevents UTXO from spending any method other than treatment that matches pre -determined fragmentation; In principle, this can be done without using pre -signed transactions with the comparison of more complexity of coordination and the risk of failure to create a tree.

Lightning channels will work mainly like Poon-Dryja channels, but they also need to include all additional transactions previously signed in the tree, and are subject to the end of the tree as a whole.

Is this lightning? Or is this something else?

What about ln-syymmetry? This is a suggestion that uses CTV and Checksgfromstack (CSFS), which is an OPCond code that allows you to check a signature against arbitrary data in a treatment to replace the completely cancellation key and the cancellation mechanism.

Instead of the cancellation system, the LN-symmetry creates the concept of floating signature or floating treatment. LN’s textual program contains two ways to spend, either the CTV branch that closes spending on the transaction that represents the balance distribution of this channel’s condition, or the CTV + CSFS branch that allows any treatment of CTV template signed by a specific key in the text program spent. This, in conjunction with the use of different Timelock values, allows any treatment to spend any prior commitment treatment, i.e. replacing old countries with more modernity.

Instead of punishing the limb that used an old treatment, LN-syymmetry “corrects the old treatment of the distribution of balances based on the current state instead. Is this still lightning? Or is this very different?

Protocols for rolling up payment

HASH-Time (HTLCS) contracts are used to direct payments via the lightning network. Each HTLC either ends the advanced payment forward with a premage detection to a fragmentation, or allows it to be recovered back if it is not revealed in a timely manner. This is the mechanism that is safely implemented that every jump from the push either move forward to the recipient, or back to the sender (if it is not possible to complete).

This is not the only way to achieve this goal.

Point Timelock (PTLCS) contracts are another mechanism that can be used instead of HTLCS. PTLCS takes advantage of the transformer signatures instead of Premages and Assiers to provide atomic guarantees between all jumps in payment. The transformer signatures are encryptive signatures that had added data value to them – or removing them from them – to make them inappropriate. The signature can now be made only again by adding (or removing) the “transformer value” that was used in the first place.

Payments are signed along the path with the transformer signatures, taking advantage of the batch that launches the information necessary to make it valid again. But this is not radically different from HTLC; It only uses a different mechanism to facilitate.

Let’s take a look very different: protected payments. This is an old suggestion to completely get rid of HTLCS to redirect payments. The idea is to divide one payment into many payments of very small value, for example 100 satoshis, then Just blindly, to be directed to an equation with guidance instructions.

The recipient can tell the sender every time the “payment package” will successfully arrive, and if one does not reach, the sender knows that jumping along the way does not honestly redirect the money. They can stop using this path and try another path, just lost 100 satushes in this process.

Is this still lightning or something completely different? Channel transactions will work in the same way and the steering protocol will be identical, but is the lightning?

Guidance protocols

What if we replace the entire guidance protocol? Lightning is currently using gossip to ensure that all the lightning contract on the network has a relatively good map of the different channels across the network, the amount of bitcoin in it, and the fees you receive – all the information necessary for each knot to determine the entire guidance path for its payments on its own.

Ant Routing is a suggestion to get rid of all of this completely: to direct the network payments without any gossip, without any map of the network, and without the sender choosing the path that is dominated by his payment.

The design that must be accomplished is built around “Fairomon Paths” and “Fairomon Seeds”, which are special messages that are broadcast on the entire network in order to facilitate payments. Together, the sender and the future generate a large random number, and create a partial fragmentation of that (Fairomon seeds). Then both ends are broadcast to all their direct peers with a meter that increases by a rate of +1 at a time when the seed is passed along.

Ultimately, one knot in the network will receive both seeds, and you know it is the connection point for the full path between the sender and the future. At this stage, this knot will send a response message again in both directions, and when the sender and the future confirm both of the response, they can coordinate the payment.

It will be passed again along the way to the contact point, and from there to the reception device, all without anyone along the path, including the sender and the future, having to build the path themselves or having any idea of the full track.

Is this lightning network still? Or is this completely different?

What is this?!

The Lightning Network is a series of pre -signed transactions to impose a balance distribution between users, as well as other mechanisms involved in updating that distribution and synchronization of these updates between users all over the network.

But does this also describe ARK? Or Attchains? Yes. These are my points.

The basic idea of the Lightning is only to update the agreements on how to distribute money outside the series, while ensuring the possibility of applying the latest version of this agreement to the series if necessary, without a field for a party involved to “deceive the system” and impose the past agreement more convenient.

There are many different ways to achieve this goal. The method currently used is simply the first concrete method that has been identified. There, it can be, more and different ways to do this. Over time, methods and tools will change to achieve this goal.

It may work in a completely new way on the oldest way. A new way may work better in a specific scenario or position. But the new roads will definitely come, and that’s good.

Some things will change completely, while others will only be slight differences of what happened before, but lightning will be guided over time. It needs to continue to expand in the long run, to solve its own problems, to help the Bitcoin work as money.

Lightning will develop.

Do not miss your opportunity to own The issue of lightning It features an exclusive interview with the creation of Lightning Tadge Dryja. It dives deep into the strongest slicing layer in Bitcoin. Limited operation. Available only while supplies continue.

This article is an article that appeared in the latest version of Bitcoin magazine, The Lightning Issue. We share it here to show the ideas that were explored during the full number.