[Lightning-dev] Base AMP

Johan Torås Halseth johanth at gmail.com
Mon Nov 26 07:58:24 UTC 2018

This shouldn't be problem, as the invoice will already indicate that the
node supports BaseAMP. If you have a reason to not reveal that you support
BAMP for certain invoices, you'll just not specify it in the invoice, and
act non-BAMPy when receiving payments to this payment hash.

Of course, this will also be opt-in for both sides and won't affect
existing nodes in any way.


On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:54 PM Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au>

> Johan Torås Halseth <johanth at gmail.com> writes:
> > Seems like we can restrict the changes to BOLT11 by having the receiver
> > assume NAMP for incoming payments < invoice_amount. (with some timeout of
> > course, but that would need to be the case even when the sender is
> > signalling NAMP).
> This would effectively become a probe for Base AMP; if you get a partial
> payment error, it's because the recipient didn't support Base AMP.
> Seems cleaner to have a flag, both on BOLT11 and inside the onion.  Then
> it's explicitly opt-in for both sides and doesn't affect existing nodes
> in any way.
> Cheers,
> Rusty.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20181126/67166a9b/attachment.html>

More information about the Lightning-dev mailing list