Advertisement

Sprites and State Channels: Payment Networks that Go Faster Than Lightning

  • Andrew MillerEmail author
  • Iddo Bentov
  • Surya Bakshi
  • Ranjit Kumaresan
  • Patrick McCorry
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11598)

Abstract

Bitcoin, Ethereum and other blockchain-based cryptocurrencies, as deployed today, cannot support more than several transactions per second. Off-chain payment channels, a “layer 2” solution, are a leading approach for cryptocurrency scaling. They enable two mutually distrustful parties to rapidly send payments between each other and can be linked together to form a payment network, such that payments between any two parties can be routed through the network along a path that connects them.

We propose a novel payment channel protocol, called Sprites. The main advantage of Sprites compared with earlier protocols is a reduced “collateral cost,” meaning the amount of money \(\times \) time that must be locked up before disputes are settled. In the Lightning Network and Raiden, a payment across a path of \(\ell \) channels requires locking up collateral for \(\varTheta (\ell \varDelta )\) time, where \(\varDelta \) is the time to commit an on-chain transaction; every additional node on the path forces an increase in lock time. The Sprites construction provides a constant lock time, reducing the overall collateral cost to \(\varTheta (\ell + \varDelta ).\) Our presentation of the Sprites protocol is also modular, making use of a generic state channel abstraction. Finally, Sprites improves on prior payment channel constructions by supporting partial withdrawals and deposits without any on-chain transactions.

References

  1. 1.
    Bentov, I., Kumaresan, R.: How to use bitcoin to design fair protocols. In: Garay, J.A., Gennaro, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2014. LNCS, vol. 8617, pp. 421–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44381-1_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bentov, I., Kumaresan, R., Miller, A.: Instantaneous decentralized poker. In: Takagi, T., Peyrin, T. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2017. LNCS, vol. 10625, pp. 410–440. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70697-9_15. https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.06726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castro, M., Liskov, B.: Practical byzantine fault tolerance. In: OSDI (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Decker, C., Wattenhofer, R.: A fast and scalable payment network with bitcoin duplex micropayment channels. In: Pelc, A., Schwarzmann, A.A. (eds.) SSS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9212, pp. 3–18. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21741-3_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dziembowski, S., Eckey, L., Faust, S., Malinowski, D.: PERUN: virtual payment channels over cryptographic currencies (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    hashxp: September 2018. https://hashxp.org/lightning
  7. 7.
    Eyal, I., Gencer, A.E., Sirer, E.G., van Renesse, R.: Bitcoin-NG: a scalable blockchain protocol. In: NSDI (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khalil, R., Gervais, A.: Revive: rebalancing off-blockchain payment networks. In: ACM CCS (2017). http://eprint.iacr.org/2017/823
  9. 9.
    Kokoris-Kogias, E., Jovanovic, P., Gailly, N., Khoffi, I., Gasser, L., Ford, B.: Enhancing bitcoin security and performance with strong consistency via collective signing. In: USENIX Security Symposium (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumaresan, R., Bentov, I.: How to use bitcoin to incentivize correct computations. In: CCS (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Luu, L., Narayanan, V., Baweja, K., Zheng, C., Gilbert, S., Saxena, P.: SCP: a computationally-scalable byzantine consensus protocol for blockchains. In: CCS (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Malavolta, G., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Kate, A., Maffei, M., Ravi, S.: Concurrency and privacy with payment-channel networks (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    McCorry, P., Bakshi, S., Bentov, I., Meiklejohn, S., Miller, A.: Pisa: arbitration outsourcing for state channels (2018). https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~iddo/pisa.pdf
  14. 14.
    Moreno-Sanchez, P., Kate, A., Maffei, M.: Silentwhispers: enforcing security and privacy in decentralized credit networks (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Network, R.: (2015). http://raiden.network/
  16. 16.
    Nolan, T.: Alt chains and atomic transfers, May 2013. bitcointalk.org
  17. 17.
    Pass, R., Shi, E.: Hybrid consensus: efficient consensus in the permissionless model. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2016/917 (2016). http://eprint.iacr.org/2016/917
  18. 18.
    Peterson, D.: Sparky: a lightning network in two pages of solidity. http://www.blunderingcode.com/a-lightning-network-in-two-pages-of-solidity
  19. 19.
    Poon, J., Dryja, T.: The bitcoin lightning network: scalable off-chain instant payments (2016). https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf
  20. 20.
    Prihodko, P., Zhigulin, S., Sahno, M., Ostrovskiy, A., Osuntokun, O.: Flare: an approach to routing in lightning network. Whitepaper (2016). http://bitfury.com/content/5-white-papers-research/whitepaper_flare_an_approach_to_routing_in_lightning_network_7_7_2016.pdf
  21. 21.
    Roos, S., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Kate, A., Goldberg, I.: Settling payments fast and private: efficient decentralized routing for path-based transactions. In: NDSS (2018)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sivaraman, V., Venkatakrishnan, S.B., Alizadeh, M., Fanti, G., Viswanath, P.: Routing cryptocurrency with the spider network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.05088 (2018)
  23. 23.

Copyright information

© International Financial Cryptography Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Miller
    • 1
    Email author
  • Iddo Bentov
    • 2
  • Surya Bakshi
    • 1
  • Ranjit Kumaresan
    • 3
  • Patrick McCorry
    • 4
  1. 1.University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.Cornell TechNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.VISA ResearchPalo AltoUSA
  4. 4.King’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations