Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update README and add bLIP-0001 #1

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 7, 2021
Merged

Update README and add bLIP-0001 #1

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 7, 2021

Conversation

ryanthegentry
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR initializes the new bLIPs repo with a README modeled after the BIPs README, and adds bLIP-0001, which was previously being discussed in PR #884 in the lightning-rfc repo.

Only a few adjustments have been made to bLIP-0001 while transferring from the previous repo:

  1. added a mandated Universality section requesting proposals "discuss why the given feature is not intended to be
    universal and why it's still a good idea as a non-universal protocol" per @TheBlueMatt's feedback.
  2. added that Feature Bits >100 yet <1000 were reserved for experimentation per @rustyrussell's comments in the 9/27 lightning-dev IRC meeting, and the same for TLVs > 65536 per Bolt #1.
  3. fixed a few links/comments that would no longer be correct with a new bLIPs repo (hope I didn't miss any!).

Once these two docs are merged, the next step IMO will be to close the old PR and open a new one for a BOLT #13 (?) that acts as a central registry for bLIP'd Feature Bits, Message Types, and TLVs (and maybe more down the road...) per @t-bast's feedback (replacing PRs #605 and #716 from lightning-rfc). Maybe specifying the process of approving a bLIP using one of these resources, and then adding the resource assignment to the new BOLT, could be a good bLIP-0002?

Copy link
Contributor

@Roasbeef Roasbeef left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Carrying over my approval here from the other repo

LGTM ☄️

@dangershony
Copy link

Hi, I know I don't comment here much (I observe though) I am curious as to why is the b lower case? intuitively BLIP seems more inline with the BIP, BOLT systems. (apologies if this was discussed already).

@t-bast
Copy link
Contributor

t-bast commented Dec 7, 2021

Agreed, I find bLIP kinda weird, not sure why it uses this casing.
And FWIW I voted for "sparks" 😎

@ryanthegentry ryanthegentry merged commit ba5fee2 into master Dec 7, 2021
@ryanthegentry ryanthegentry deleted the updateReadme branch December 7, 2021 15:04
ffranr pushed a commit to ffranr/blips that referenced this pull request Apr 4, 2024
blip-29: use Unix timestamp for RFQ accepted quote expiry
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants