mirror of
https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook
synced 2024-12-23 07:08:13 +00:00
Remove "short" from timelock sentence
I think that short provides an unnecessary detail to the explanation. The timelock can be short or long. Also, in the provided example, the timelock expires after around 7 days, which may or may not be short.
This commit is contained in:
parent
f8b883dcd4
commit
3a62587d88
@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ Output 1:
|
||||
<Irene's Public Key> CHECKSIG
|
||||
----
|
||||
|
||||
This way, each party has a commitment transaction, spending the 2-of-2 funding output. This input is signed by the _other_ party. At any time the party holding the transaction can also sign (completing the 2-of-2) and broadcast. However, if they broadcast the commitment transaction, it pays the other party immediately whereas they have to wait for a short timelock to expire. By imposing a delay on the redemption of one of the outputs, we put each party at a slight disadvantage when they choose to unilaterally broadcast a commitment transaction. But a time delay alone isn't enough to encourage fair conduct.
|
||||
This way, each party has a commitment transaction, spending the 2-of-2 funding output. This input is signed by the _other_ party. At any time the party holding the transaction can also sign (completing the 2-of-2) and broadcast. However, if they broadcast the commitment transaction, it pays the other party immediately whereas they have to wait for a timelock to expire. By imposing a delay on the redemption of one of the outputs, we put each party at a slight disadvantage when they choose to unilaterally broadcast a commitment transaction. But a time delay alone isn't enough to encourage fair conduct.
|
||||
|
||||
<<asymmetric_commitments>> shows two asymmetric commitment transactions, where the output paying the holder of the commitment is delayed.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user