<div dir="ltr">I don't understand your point, but that may come from me not having<div>deep enough knowledge about the latest great things happening on</div><div>Lightning.</div><div><br></div><div>I exposed the case of a simple bipayment channel, without HTLC in the</div><div>equation, where all payments are sequential. </div><div><br></div><div>You can't make commitment n+2 before accepting commitment n+1.</div><div><br></div><div>My mental model might be incomplete as I'm followed only remotely</div><div>the improvements of lightning until now.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Mats Jerratsch <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mats@blockchain.com" target="_blank">mats@blockchain.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I'm not saying they close the channel. Alice could want to receive more<br>
money and accept other payments, but not a particular one. But by doing<br>
so, she would automatically disclose R for any old payment.<br>
<span class="im HOEnZb"><br>
Am 08/03/2016 um 15:51 schrieb Nicolas Dorier:<br>
> I'm not sure what you mean Alice don't have to disclose R if she does<br>
> not want to.<br>
<br>
</span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">--<br>
Mats Jerratsch<br>
Backend Engineer, Blockchain<br>
e: <a href="mailto:mats@blockchain.com">mats@blockchain.com</a><br>
PGP: <a href="https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7F3EC6CA" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7F3EC6CA</a><br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>