# SuperScalar: Laddered Timeout-Tree-Structured Decker-Wattenhofer Factories

**URL:** <https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143>\
**Category:** Protocol Design\
**Tags:** lightning\
**Created:** [September 16, 2024, 8:08pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143 "2024-09-16T20:08:19Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 17

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ariard](https://delvingbitcoin.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@ariard](https://delvingbitcoin.org/u/ariard)\
**Post date:** [October 2, 2024, 10:48pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143/17 "2024-10-02T22:48:07Z")

</div>

> [@ZmnSCPxj](#):
>
> An assisted exit is a PTLC in the in-factory construction from user to LSP, followed by an onchain PTLC from LSP to user, with the scalar being the private key that client is using for the in-factory constructions

In the worst-case, how do you guarantee the user to guarantee PTLC-to-LSP and PTLC-to-LSP to settle at the same time ? And the user to have enough funds to confirms those 2 transactions under few blocks of relapse.

See my point above the “Forced Expiration Spam”: [https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf](https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf) 3 I don’t see how you’re making things better here.

---

_[View the full topic](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/superscalar-laddered-timeout-tree-structured-decker-wattenhofer-factories/1143)._