-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 146
Newsletters: add 89 (2020-03-18) #372
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| title: 'Bitcoin Optech Newsletter #89' | ||
| permalink: /en/newsletters/2020/03/18/ | ||
| name: 2020-03-18-newsletter | ||
| slug: 2020-03-18-newsletter | ||
| type: newsletter | ||
| layout: newsletter | ||
| lang: en | ||
| --- | ||
| This week's newsletter summarizes an update to a proposed standard for | ||
| LN and includes our regular sections about notable changes to services, | ||
| client software, and popular Bitcoin infrastructure projects. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Action items | ||
|
|
||
| *None this week.* | ||
|
|
||
| ## News | ||
|
|
||
| - **Proposed watchtower BOLT has been updated:** Sergi Delgado Segura | ||
| [emailed][segura email] the Lightning-Dev mailing list an [updated | ||
| version][watchtower bolt] of a suggested protocol for | ||
| [watchtower][topic watchtowers] communication. See [Newsletter | ||
| #75][news75 watchtower] for our original description of this proposal. According to | ||
| Segura, the update includes details about "user accounts, payment | ||
| methods, and message signing." His email also provides a list of | ||
| features he would like to add, with discussion about each near the end | ||
| of the email. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Changes to services and client software | ||
|
|
||
| *In this monthly feature, we highlight interesting updates to Bitcoin | ||
| wallets and services.* | ||
|
|
||
| - **Coinbase withdrawal transactions now using batching:** Coinbase has rolled | ||
| out [batch withdrawals][coinbase batching blog] that they estimate will reduce | ||
| their load on the Bitcoin network by 50%. Instead of each withdrawal payment | ||
| generating a single onchain transaction, multiple payments will be | ||
| [combined into a single transaction][scaling payment batching] once every 10 minutes. | ||
|
|
||
| - **Bitstamp supports bech32:** Bitstamp users can now benefit from using native | ||
| [bech32][topic bech32] addresses after the exchange announced support for both | ||
| [bech32 deposits and withdrawals][bitstamp bech32 blog]. | ||
|
|
||
| - **Deribit supports bech32 withdrawals:** [Deribit announced][deribit bech32 | ||
| withdrawal tweet] that its exchange users can now withdraw bitcoins to bech32 | ||
| native addresses. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Notable code and documentation changes | ||
|
|
||
| *Notable changes this week in [Bitcoin Core][bitcoin core repo], | ||
| [C-Lightning][c-lightning repo], [Eclair][eclair repo], [LND][lnd repo], | ||
| [libsecp256k1][libsecp256k1 repo], [Bitcoin Improvement Proposals | ||
| (BIPs)][bips repo], and [Lightning BOLTs][bolts repo].* | ||
|
|
||
| - [Bitcoin Core #16902][] changes consensus code to fix an inefficiency | ||
| in the parsing of `OP_IF` and related opcodes. In legacy and segwit | ||
| v0 script, the inefficiency isn't believed to cause any significant | ||
| problems. However, the proposal for [tapscript][topic tapscript] would | ||
| make it possible for an attacker to use the inefficiency to create blocks with transactions | ||
| that could take a large amount of CPU to verify. Fixing the | ||
| inefficiency now reduces the number of changes that need to be made in the | ||
| proposed schnorr, taproot, and tapscript soft fork. For more | ||
| information, see the Bitcoin Core PR Review Club [meeting notes][club | ||
| #16902] about this PR. | ||
|
|
||
| - [LND #3821][] adds [anchor commitments][topic anchor outputs] for | ||
| LN channels and enables them by default if both participating nodes of a | ||
| channel signal support. Anchor commitment transactions can be fee | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Looked at the changeset to verify that anchor commitments are auto-enabled if both participants signal support"; comment and code seems to be here, lines 1114-1126: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/pull/3821/files#diff-691ca64693e704fd2e5080998f3e640eR1114 |
||
| bumped unilaterally by either party, which is useful because | ||
| commitment transactions might be broadcast a long time after they | ||
| commit to their on-chain feerate. | ||
|
|
||
| - [LND #3963][] adds detailed [documentation][lnd op safety] about how | ||
| to use LND safely. | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This looks like a PR of truly high value to users that might be worth a bit more pizzazz here. FWIW I like the name "lnd Operational Safety Guidelines". |
||
|
|
||
| - [Eclair #1319][] implements the same solution as described in | ||
|
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. |
||
| [Newsletter #85][news85 ln stuck] for a rare stuck-channels problem | ||
| where payments are rejected for insufficient funds when the channel | ||
| funder is receiving the money but doesn't have enough balance to | ||
| afford the payment's commitment (HTLC) cost. | ||
|
|
||
| {% include references.md %} | ||
| {% include linkers/issues.md issues="16902,3821,3963,1319" %} | ||
| [lnd op safety]: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/safety.md | ||
| [segura email]: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2020-March/002586.html | ||
| [watchtower bolt]: https://github.com/sr-gi/bolt13/blob/master/13-watchtowers.md | ||
| [club #16902]: https://bitcoincore.reviews/16902/ | ||
| [news75 watchtower]: /en/newsletters/2019/12/04/#proposed-watchtower-bolt | ||
| [news85 ln stuck]: /en/newsletters/2020/02/19/#c-lightning-3500 | ||
| [coinbase batching blog]: https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-rolls-out-bitcoin-transaction-batching-5f6d09b8b045 | ||
| [bitstamp bech32 blog]: https://www.bitstamp.net/article/weve-added-support-bech32-bitcoin-addresses-bitsta/ | ||
| [deribit bech32 withdrawal tweet]: https://twitter.com/DeribitExchange/status/1234904442169851909 | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps hoist "deposits and withdrawals" to the bitstamp title for clear quick comparison to the derebit title while skim reading.