From 3a62587d88611c57650adb13d88725d075a35697 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lorenzo Manacorda Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 13:04:11 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] 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. --- ch12.asciidoc | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/ch12.asciidoc b/ch12.asciidoc index 4923bbc2..0d49b746 100644 --- a/ch12.asciidoc +++ b/ch12.asciidoc @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ Output 1: 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. <> shows two asymmetric commitment transactions, where the output paying the holder of the commitment is delayed.