[bisq-network/proposals] Allow unsafe payment methods if buyer locked up a BSQ bond (#131)

chimp1984 notifications at github.com
Mon Oct 28 23:23:26 UTC 2019

> BSQ used for bonds as trading collateral (i.e. in the v2 proposal) feels a lot harder to justify when the existing "security deposit" system, combined with "secure payment methods", works so well. The only real problem with security deposit transactions is the lack of optimization for on-chain TX fees. For example, a good start would be fixing it not to use 4 huge on-chain TXs, even a single on-chain TX with segwit/bech32 would be a huge improvement - of course moving to some multisig Lightning transaction would be best.

There aree plenty of problems and restrictions with the current trade protocol.
- Miner fee
- Onchain privacy
- Slow due requirement for block confirmation
- Maker need to be online

Reducing to 2 tx instead of 4 might be possible but not sure and not trivial. But still does only reduce on of the many problems.

I am not sure if MultiSig on Lightning is feasible and possible in any realistic time frame. Once it is a possibility it is for sure something we need to look at. But my hopes for that are rather low (talked with some LN devs).

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20191028/2b8d09c6/attachment.html>

More information about the bisq-github mailing list