3 ms·

So it requires one on-chain transaction per pair of parties instead of one per transaction? Clever and I suppose useful but seems a little limited in use, given

by tgb 5y ago

So it requires one on-chain transaction per pair of parties instead of one per transaction? Clever and I suppose useful but seems a little limited in use, given that the funds are locked the whole time. Good for two parties that frequently have transactions going in both directions?

jallen_dot_dev 5y ago
That's right. You can also form a chain of these channels, so Alice can pay Bob even though she doesn't have a channel with him, if they both connect to Carol using atomic transactions that update the 2 channels accordingly.