Following up from yesterday’s spec meet. This is my stance:
We can create friction by adding granularity or enforcing a minimum hold time, but this feels more like avoiding the problem than solving it. If users want fast routes, they will find them regardless. Even without explicit hold time data, latency can be inferred from sender observations over multiple payments. A scoring system that distributes observed delays across route hops is likely sufficient to identify slow nodes over time.
Rather than relying on filtering or encoding tricks that can be bypassed or become outdated, we should embrace the reality that the network will be exposed to performance pressures. This transparency can motivate stronger and more effective privacy solutions aligned with actual user incentives.
In my view, it is more sustainable to design the network to be resilient and private even when nodes compete on latency, rather than relying on weak measures that only obscure the problem and leave critical questions unanswered.