Can a Lightning channel's initial BTC value be updated?












1














When an LN channel is created, it is funded with an initial BTC amount by at least one one peer. But given that most of the whole idea of LN is the existence of long running channels, I wonder if this means that it's possible for a channel to be "emptied", thus making "long running" a bit of a misnomer. Is it therefore possible for the channel's creator to "top up" the channel?






lightning-network payment







share|improve this question






















  • There is some work being done here with splicing, where the channel partipants agree to spend the output of the opening TX together with additional inputs to a new multisig output from which to create commitment txs, thereby increasing channel capacity.
    – James C.
    yesterday












  • Splicing in and splicing out, as funds could also be reduced. However both results in a new tx confirmed on chain, which is the cost of adjusting the channel capacity after it has been opened.
    – James C.
    yesterday
















1














When an LN channel is created, it is funded with an initial BTC amount by at least one one peer. But given that most of the whole idea of LN is the existence of long running channels, I wonder if this means that it's possible for a channel to be "emptied", thus making "long running" a bit of a misnomer. Is it therefore possible for the channel's creator to "top up" the channel?






lightning-network payment







share|improve this question






















  • There is some work being done here with splicing, where the channel partipants agree to spend the output of the opening TX together with additional inputs to a new multisig output from which to create commitment txs, thereby increasing channel capacity.
    – James C.
    yesterday












  • Splicing in and splicing out, as funds could also be reduced. However both results in a new tx confirmed on chain, which is the cost of adjusting the channel capacity after it has been opened.
    – James C.
    yesterday














1












1








1







When an LN channel is created, it is funded with an initial BTC amount by at least one one peer. But given that most of the whole idea of LN is the existence of long running channels, I wonder if this means that it's possible for a channel to be "emptied", thus making "long running" a bit of a misnomer. Is it therefore possible for the channel's creator to "top up" the channel?






lightning-network payment







share|improve this question













When an LN channel is created, it is funded with an initial BTC amount by at least one one peer. But given that most of the whole idea of LN is the existence of long running channels, I wonder if this means that it's possible for a channel to be "emptied", thus making "long running" a bit of a misnomer. Is it therefore possible for the channel's creator to "top up" the channel?






lightning-network payment




lightning-network payment






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked yesterday









therusstheruss

1156




1156












  • There is some work being done here with splicing, where the channel partipants agree to spend the output of the opening TX together with additional inputs to a new multisig output from which to create commitment txs, thereby increasing channel capacity.
    – James C.
    yesterday












  • Splicing in and splicing out, as funds could also be reduced. However both results in a new tx confirmed on chain, which is the cost of adjusting the channel capacity after it has been opened.
    – James C.
    yesterday


















  • There is some work being done here with splicing, where the channel partipants agree to spend the output of the opening TX together with additional inputs to a new multisig output from which to create commitment txs, thereby increasing channel capacity.
    – James C.
    yesterday












  • Splicing in and splicing out, as funds could also be reduced. However both results in a new tx confirmed on chain, which is the cost of adjusting the channel capacity after it has been opened.
    – James C.
    yesterday
















There is some work being done here with splicing, where the channel partipants agree to spend the output of the opening TX together with additional inputs to a new multisig output from which to create commitment txs, thereby increasing channel capacity.
– James C.
yesterday






There is some work being done here with splicing, where the channel partipants agree to spend the output of the opening TX together with additional inputs to a new multisig output from which to create commitment txs, thereby increasing channel capacity.
– James C.
yesterday














Splicing in and splicing out, as funds could also be reduced. However both results in a new tx confirmed on chain, which is the cost of adjusting the channel capacity after it has been opened.
– James C.
yesterday




Splicing in and splicing out, as funds could also be reduced. However both results in a new tx confirmed on chain, which is the cost of adjusting the channel capacity after it has been opened.
– James C.
yesterday










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2














No. The amount of money in a channel cannot be changed once the channel exists. Channels cannot be topped up nor can they be "cashed out". Any change to the channel balance would require using new outputs and funding transactions. If it were the same channel (so the channel state is not committed to the blockchain), then fraud could occur where an old commitment transaction is broadcast that was from before new funds were added to the channel.



However, there is work on splicing, but that's more like closing a channel and jointly opening a new one.






share|improve this answer





















  • Thanks both of you for your time. Very helpful.
    – theruss
    yesterday










  • though it is not quite clear which of the splicing proposals will be used so I would say it is only one way to splice a channel to close and jointly open a new one. Technically splicing should run asynchronously in the sense that the channel stays operationally during the splicing operation
    – Rene Pickhardt
    yesterday



















1














Currently the capacity of a channel stays the same. However on the Lightning Developer Summit in Australia in November 2018 it was agreed that Splicing should be added to lightning. With splicing you can increase or decrease the capacity of a channel (and your balance)



If you don't care about capacity but just about the balance and you want to refill the channel of your channel there are four things you can do:




  1. You can receive a lightning payment by selling some good (:

  2. If you just fund to fill up capacity you could use a submarine swap which works by sending bitcoin in order to pay for a lightning invoice.

  3. You can also use exchange services like zigzag.io in order to send money from your channel to a bitcoin address.

  4. You can route a payment to yourself in order to rebalance 2 of your channels.






share|improve this answer





















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "308"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f83429%2fcan-a-lightning-channels-initial-btc-value-be-updated%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2














    No. The amount of money in a channel cannot be changed once the channel exists. Channels cannot be topped up nor can they be "cashed out". Any change to the channel balance would require using new outputs and funding transactions. If it were the same channel (so the channel state is not committed to the blockchain), then fraud could occur where an old commitment transaction is broadcast that was from before new funds were added to the channel.



    However, there is work on splicing, but that's more like closing a channel and jointly opening a new one.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Thanks both of you for your time. Very helpful.
      – theruss
      yesterday










    • though it is not quite clear which of the splicing proposals will be used so I would say it is only one way to splice a channel to close and jointly open a new one. Technically splicing should run asynchronously in the sense that the channel stays operationally during the splicing operation
      – Rene Pickhardt
      yesterday
















    2














    No. The amount of money in a channel cannot be changed once the channel exists. Channels cannot be topped up nor can they be "cashed out". Any change to the channel balance would require using new outputs and funding transactions. If it were the same channel (so the channel state is not committed to the blockchain), then fraud could occur where an old commitment transaction is broadcast that was from before new funds were added to the channel.



    However, there is work on splicing, but that's more like closing a channel and jointly opening a new one.






    share|improve this answer





















    • Thanks both of you for your time. Very helpful.
      – theruss
      yesterday










    • though it is not quite clear which of the splicing proposals will be used so I would say it is only one way to splice a channel to close and jointly open a new one. Technically splicing should run asynchronously in the sense that the channel stays operationally during the splicing operation
      – Rene Pickhardt
      yesterday














    2












    2








    2






    No. The amount of money in a channel cannot be changed once the channel exists. Channels cannot be topped up nor can they be "cashed out". Any change to the channel balance would require using new outputs and funding transactions. If it were the same channel (so the channel state is not committed to the blockchain), then fraud could occur where an old commitment transaction is broadcast that was from before new funds were added to the channel.



    However, there is work on splicing, but that's more like closing a channel and jointly opening a new one.






    share|improve this answer












    No. The amount of money in a channel cannot be changed once the channel exists. Channels cannot be topped up nor can they be "cashed out". Any change to the channel balance would require using new outputs and funding transactions. If it were the same channel (so the channel state is not committed to the blockchain), then fraud could occur where an old commitment transaction is broadcast that was from before new funds were added to the channel.



    However, there is work on splicing, but that's more like closing a channel and jointly opening a new one.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered yesterday









    Andrew Chow♦Andrew Chow

    30.9k42261




    30.9k42261












    • Thanks both of you for your time. Very helpful.
      – theruss
      yesterday










    • though it is not quite clear which of the splicing proposals will be used so I would say it is only one way to splice a channel to close and jointly open a new one. Technically splicing should run asynchronously in the sense that the channel stays operationally during the splicing operation
      – Rene Pickhardt
      yesterday


















    • Thanks both of you for your time. Very helpful.
      – theruss
      yesterday










    • though it is not quite clear which of the splicing proposals will be used so I would say it is only one way to splice a channel to close and jointly open a new one. Technically splicing should run asynchronously in the sense that the channel stays operationally during the splicing operation
      – Rene Pickhardt
      yesterday
















    Thanks both of you for your time. Very helpful.
    – theruss
    yesterday




    Thanks both of you for your time. Very helpful.
    – theruss
    yesterday












    though it is not quite clear which of the splicing proposals will be used so I would say it is only one way to splice a channel to close and jointly open a new one. Technically splicing should run asynchronously in the sense that the channel stays operationally during the splicing operation
    – Rene Pickhardt
    yesterday




    though it is not quite clear which of the splicing proposals will be used so I would say it is only one way to splice a channel to close and jointly open a new one. Technically splicing should run asynchronously in the sense that the channel stays operationally during the splicing operation
    – Rene Pickhardt
    yesterday











    1














    Currently the capacity of a channel stays the same. However on the Lightning Developer Summit in Australia in November 2018 it was agreed that Splicing should be added to lightning. With splicing you can increase or decrease the capacity of a channel (and your balance)



    If you don't care about capacity but just about the balance and you want to refill the channel of your channel there are four things you can do:




    1. You can receive a lightning payment by selling some good (:

    2. If you just fund to fill up capacity you could use a submarine swap which works by sending bitcoin in order to pay for a lightning invoice.

    3. You can also use exchange services like zigzag.io in order to send money from your channel to a bitcoin address.

    4. You can route a payment to yourself in order to rebalance 2 of your channels.






    share|improve this answer


























      1














      Currently the capacity of a channel stays the same. However on the Lightning Developer Summit in Australia in November 2018 it was agreed that Splicing should be added to lightning. With splicing you can increase or decrease the capacity of a channel (and your balance)



      If you don't care about capacity but just about the balance and you want to refill the channel of your channel there are four things you can do:




      1. You can receive a lightning payment by selling some good (:

      2. If you just fund to fill up capacity you could use a submarine swap which works by sending bitcoin in order to pay for a lightning invoice.

      3. You can also use exchange services like zigzag.io in order to send money from your channel to a bitcoin address.

      4. You can route a payment to yourself in order to rebalance 2 of your channels.






      share|improve this answer
























        1












        1








        1






        Currently the capacity of a channel stays the same. However on the Lightning Developer Summit in Australia in November 2018 it was agreed that Splicing should be added to lightning. With splicing you can increase or decrease the capacity of a channel (and your balance)



        If you don't care about capacity but just about the balance and you want to refill the channel of your channel there are four things you can do:




        1. You can receive a lightning payment by selling some good (:

        2. If you just fund to fill up capacity you could use a submarine swap which works by sending bitcoin in order to pay for a lightning invoice.

        3. You can also use exchange services like zigzag.io in order to send money from your channel to a bitcoin address.

        4. You can route a payment to yourself in order to rebalance 2 of your channels.






        share|improve this answer












        Currently the capacity of a channel stays the same. However on the Lightning Developer Summit in Australia in November 2018 it was agreed that Splicing should be added to lightning. With splicing you can increase or decrease the capacity of a channel (and your balance)



        If you don't care about capacity but just about the balance and you want to refill the channel of your channel there are four things you can do:




        1. You can receive a lightning payment by selling some good (:

        2. If you just fund to fill up capacity you could use a submarine swap which works by sending bitcoin in order to pay for a lightning invoice.

        3. You can also use exchange services like zigzag.io in order to send money from your channel to a bitcoin address.

        4. You can route a payment to yourself in order to rebalance 2 of your channels.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered yesterday









        Rene PickhardtRene Pickhardt

        53212




        53212






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Bitcoin Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f83429%2fcan-a-lightning-channels-initial-btc-value-be-updated%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            How to make a Squid Proxy server?

            Image
            1 I want to set up squid proxy server for monitoring user activity in a network and Internet Web URL filtering for user. I also want to configure the user login, user log, user access group, and block unwanted web sites in my network. Please help me and guide me the full process to do this. server proxy squid share | improve this question edited Jul 31 '12 at 14:45 Jorge Castro 37.1k 107 422 617 asked Jul 31 '12 at 5:16 Goivind Tiwari Goivind Tiwari ...
            Read more

            Is this a new Fibonacci Identity?

            Image
            6 1 $begingroup$ I have found the following Fibonacci Identity (and proved it). If $F_n$ denotes the nth Fibonacci Number, we have the following identity begin{equation} F_{n-r+h}F_{n+k+g+1} - F_{n-r+g}F_{n+k+h+1} = (-1)^{n+r+h+1} F_{g-h}F_{k+r+1} end{equation} where $F_1 = F_2 = 1$ , $r leq n$ , $h leq g$ , and $n, g, k in mathbb{N}$ . It is not too hard to show that this identity subsumes Cassini's Identity, Catalan's Identity, Vajda's Idenity, and d'Ocagne's identity to name a few. I have done a pretty thorough literature review, and I have not found anything like this, but I am still wondering if anyone has seen this identity before? I found this by accident after noticing some patterns in some analysis work I was doing, so if this is already known I would be curious to see w...
            Read more

            19世紀

            Image
            この記事は検証可能な参考文献や出典が全く示されていないか、不十分です。 出典を追加して記事の信頼性向上にご協力ください。 （ 2012年3月 ） 千年紀: 2千年紀 世紀: 18世紀 - 19世紀 - 20世紀 十年紀: 1800年代 1810年代 1820年代 1830年代 1840年代 1850年代 1860年代 1870年代 1880年代 1890年代 19世紀に君臨した大英帝国。 19世紀 （じゅうきゅうせいき）は、西暦1801年から西暦1900年までの100年間を指す世紀。 目次 1 19世紀の歴史 1.1 国民国家の成立 1.2 帝国主義の興隆 1.3 列強の植民地争奪戦 2 できごと 2.1 1800年代 2.2 1810年代 2.3 1820年代 2.4 1830年代 2.5 1840年代 2.6 1850年代 2.7 1860年代 2.8 1870年代 2.9 1880年代 2.10 1890年代 2.11 1900年代 3 文化 3.1 文学 3.2 音楽 3.3 思想 3.4 科学 3.5 技術 4 人物 4.1 ヨーロッパ 4.1.1 政治家・王族 4.1.1.1 フランス 4.1.1.2 オーストリア＝ハンガリー 4.1.1.3 ロシア 4.1.1.4 イギリス 4.1.1.5 ドイツ（プロイセンほかドイツ領邦を含む） 4.1.1.6 北欧 4.1.1.7 イタリア 4.1.1.8 スペイン 4.1.1.9 ベルギー 4.1.1.10 ギリシア 4.1.2 軍人 4.1.3 実業家 4.1.4 科学と技術 4.1.5 思想と哲学・人文諸学 4.1.6 宗教 4.1.7 文学 4.1.8 美術 4.1.9 音楽 4.1.10 社会事業家 4.1.11 探検家・旅行家 4.1.12 料...
            Read more