You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our router currently uses max(htlc_min, fee) for fees when picking a path, which addresses an important edge case where we might reduce a path's amount later during pathfinding and pay up to htlc_min in fees. However, when we're dealing with a path that has a bunch of nodes that have htlc_min of 1 sat and we're sending a small amount (eg a zap of 21 sats), this can start to impact our ability to pick cheap paths.
Its not clear exactly what to do here, but at a minimum we could detect cases where the per-path min means we won't be limited by the htlc_min and can prefer paths by their real fee, rather than just prop fees, when picking paths out of a candidate set during MPP.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Our router currently uses
max(htlc_min, fee)
for fees when picking a path, which addresses an important edge case where we might reduce a path's amount later during pathfinding and pay up tohtlc_min
in fees. However, when we're dealing with a path that has a bunch of nodes that havehtlc_min
of 1 sat and we're sending a small amount (eg a zap of 21 sats), this can start to impact our ability to pick cheap paths.Its not clear exactly what to do here, but at a minimum we could detect cases where the per-path min means we won't be limited by the
htlc_min
and can prefer paths by their real fee, rather than just prop fees, when picking paths out of a candidate set during MPP.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: