mirror of
https://github.com/lnbook/lnbook
synced 2024-11-18 21:28:03 +00:00
Merge pull request #738 from pamelawjd/patch-2
Update 07_payment_channels.asciidoc
This commit is contained in:
commit
38b457031d
@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ The Lightning Network is often described as a "Layer 2 Bitcoin Protocol", which
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
Historically, Bitcoin transactions are broadcast to everyone and recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain in order to be considered "valid". As we will see however, if someone holds a pre-signed Bitcoin transaction that spends a 2-of-2 multisig output that gives them the exclusive ability to spend that Bitcoin, they effectively own that Bitcoin even if they don't broadcast the transaction.
|
Historically, Bitcoin transactions are broadcast to everyone and recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain in order to be considered "valid". As we will see however, if someone holds a pre-signed Bitcoin transaction that spends a 2-of-2 multisig output that gives them the exclusive ability to spend that Bitcoin, they effectively own that Bitcoin even if they don't broadcast the transaction.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Effectively, the pre-signed Bitcoin transaction is like a post-dated check (or cheque), that can be "cashed" at anytime. Unlike the traditional banking system however, this transaction is not a "promise" of payment (also known as an IOU), but a verifiable bearer instrument that is equivalent to cash. The Bitcoin system guarantees that this pre-signed transaction can be broadcast and recorded at any time. This of course is only true if this is the only pre-signed transaction. Within the Lightning Network two or more such pre-signed transactions exists and we will need a more sophisticated mechanism to still have the functionality of such a verifiable bearer instrument as you will also learn in this chapter.
|
You can think of the pre-signed Bitcoin transaction like a post-dated check (or cheque), one that can be "cashed" at anytime. Unlike the traditional banking system however, this transaction is not a "promise" of payment (also known as an IOU), but a verifiable bearer instrument that is equivalent to cash. So long as the bitcoin referenced in the transaction has not already been spent at the time of redemption (or at the time you try to "cash" the cheque), the Bitcoin system guarantees that this pre-signed transaction can be broadcast and recorded at any time. This is only true, of course, if this is the only pre-signed transaction. Within the Lightning Network two or more such pre-signed transactions exist at the same time, therefore we need a more sophisticated mechanism to still have the functionality of such a verifiable bearer instrument, as you will also learn in this chapter.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Lightning Network is simply a different and creative way of using Bitcoin. In the Lightning Network a combination of recorded (on-chain) and pre-signed but withheld (off-chain) transactions form a "layer" of payments that is a faster, cheaper and more private way to use Bitcoin. You can see this relationship between on-chain and off-chain Bitcoin transactions in <<on_off_chain>>:
|
The Lightning Network is simply a different and creative way of using Bitcoin. In the Lightning Network a combination of recorded (on-chain) and pre-signed but withheld (off-chain) transactions form a "layer" of payments that is a faster, cheaper and more private way to use Bitcoin. You can see this relationship between on-chain and off-chain Bitcoin transactions in <<on_off_chain>>:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -42,11 +42,11 @@ Bitcoin ownership is only about control of keys and the ability to spend the Bit
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
Ownership and control of private keys is not always in the hands of one person. That's where things get interesting and complicated. We know that more than one person can come to know the same private key, either through theft or because the original holder of the key makes a copy and gives it to someone else. Are all these people owners? In a practical sense they are, because any one of the people who know the private key can spend the bitcoin without the approval of any other.
|
Ownership and control of private keys is not always in the hands of one person. That's where things get interesting and complicated. We know that more than one person can come to know the same private key, either through theft or because the original holder of the key makes a copy and gives it to someone else. Are all these people owners? In a practical sense they are, because any one of the people who know the private key can spend the bitcoin without the approval of any other.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Bitcoin also has multisignature addresses where multiple private keys are needed to sign before spending (see <<multisig>>). From a practical perspective, ownership depends on the quorum (K) and total (N) defined in the K-of-N scheme. A 1-of-10 multisignature scheme would allow any one (K) of 10 (N) signers to spend a bitcoin amount locked in that address. This is similar to the scenario where ten people have a copy of the same private key and any of them can independently spend it.
|
Bitcoin also has multisignature addresses where multiple private keys are needed to sign before spending (see <<multisig>>). From a practical perspective, ownership in a multisignature address depends on the quorum (K) and total (N) defined in the K-of-N scheme. A 1-of-10 multisignature scheme would allow any one (K) of 10 (N) signers to spend a bitcoin amount locked in that address. This is similar to the scenario where ten people have a copy of the same private key and any of them can independently spend it.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
==== Joint ownership without independent control
|
==== Joint ownership without independent control
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
There is also the scenario where *no one* has quorum. In a 2-of-2 scheme like that used in the Lightning Network, each of the signers cannot spend the bitcoin without obtaining a signature from the other party. Who owns the bitcoin in that case? No one really has ownership because no one has control. They each own the equivalent of a voting share in the decision, but both votes are needed. A key problem (pun intended) with a 2-of-2 scheme, in both Bitcoin and the law, is what happens if one of the parties is unavailable, or if there is a vote deadlock and any one party refuses to cooperate.
|
There is also the scenario where *no one* has quorum. In a 2-of-2 scheme like that used in the Lightning Network, neither signer can spend the bitcoin without obtaining a signature from the other party. Who owns the bitcoin in that case? No one really has ownership because no one has control. They each own the equivalent of a voting share in the decision, but both votes are needed. A key problem (pun intended) with a 2-of-2 scheme, in both Bitcoin and the law, is what happens if one of the parties is unavailable, or if there is a vote deadlock and any one party refuses to cooperate.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
==== Preventing "locked" and un-spendable Bitcoin
|
==== Preventing "locked" and un-spendable Bitcoin
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user