Skip to content
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

[feature]: Compare multiple peer RFQ quotes on unspecified peer #1052

Open
GeorgeTsagk opened this issue Jul 31, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

[feature]: Compare multiple peer RFQ quotes on unspecified peer #1052

GeorgeTsagk opened this issue Jul 31, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@GeorgeTsagk
Copy link
Member

Description

Currently our RPC methods for asset channel invoices/payments require the user to narrow down the tap-channel peer candidates to a single one, as we need a target to initiate the RFQ negotiation with.

This may be confusing for users as they may not be sure which peer should be chosen for a payment.

Solution

We could convert this into a feature by taking advantage of the competition amongst our asset peers in order to find the best quote, and prioritize a payment attempt using that one.

@ZZiigguurraatt
Copy link

Can we add multiple quotes to increase payment reliability but still set a priority for the route with the best rate? Do hop hints have a priority that the client is encouraged to honor?

@GeorgeTsagk
Copy link
Member Author

Can we add multiple quotes to increase payment reliability but still set a priority for the route with the best rate

Currently we can't, but we eventually want to. This is what the issue outlines

Do hop hints have a priority that the client is encouraged to honor?

Right now it's just 1 hop hint, which is the tap channel over which the receiver wants to receive (which is currently bound to 1 peer and 1 type of asset).

@GeorgeTsagk GeorgeTsagk self-assigned this Jan 28, 2025
@GeorgeTsagk GeorgeTsagk moved this from 🆕 New to 💇‍♂️Needs Shaping in Taproot-Assets Project Board Feb 6, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: 💇‍♂️Needs Shaping
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants