Escrow Services #477
PatrickGeyer
started this conversation in
Ideas
Escrow Services
#477
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
Related issue: #462 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Am trying to think how to do lightning escrow on nostr. Would enable all sorts of nostr apps where deposits required. e.g. marketplace, airbnb, uber... I'm imagining that people can advertise their lightning nodes as being the last hop escrow service by broadcasting nostr messages of a specific format, so that any app can discover active escrow services without hard coding an escrow for a specific app. Just like we don't have to hardcode relay endpoints. And can stay non-custodial if we use HODL invoices. Problems:
Maximum timeout on invoices. Currently channel fee is partly based on channel size, and they assume that liquidity will be freed ASAP as just used for instant payments currently. Can we not expand lightning network so node operators price liquidity also based on invoice max-timeouts? This parameter can already be set by nodes right? They can choose to not take part in a payment if the max timeout is 1 month, which is likely to be an escrow transaction. And yet a channel could accept those payments but with a way higher fee. I guess that's the main issue. On lightning, are hodl invoices the only way to do escrow non-custodially? I don't see it as an option to use base chain, or some sidechain that wallets would have to add support for if they want to pay on nostr apps that require 'deposit' type payments. All our favourite lightning wallets should just be able to plug and play ideally.
Max payments in flight per channel. Currently limited to 480sh due to max transaction size. Do you know if move to PTLCs removes that limitation such that a channel can have unlimited number of pending transactions?
When a buyer is requesting the invoice from the seller, there needs to be a way to specify a longer expiry on the invoice. Sounds like the endpoints currently used for zaps could be used for this, with some relatively minor adjustments. Is this a no-go? Not possible? How else can we enable non-custodial escrow on nostr without resorting to base-chain or side-chains?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions