[DO NOT MERGE NOT TESTED] consensusWithdraw proposol

[roninjin10]

Basically the idea is we close the channel just like consensus close. But instead of routing the payment to PartyA and PartyI we route some of it to an agreed upon address and route the rest into a brand new channel. This solution means we don't need to change any dispute cases.

[nginnever]

looks good, though I would imagine if you're working with cooperative state you could just keep the channel open and have consensusWithdrawal just remove some agreed upon balance.

[ArjunBhuptani]

Agreed. I think all you have to do is require(params.nonce > channels[channel_id].nonce) which stops people from doing a replay attack with an old consensus withdraw state

[roninjin10]

Yea that makes a lot of sense. Then the withdrawal doesn't need to be submitted to chain until right before a consensus close or during a challenge period.

[roninjin10]

That would allow both parties to continue on without waiting for a confirmation for the new channel to open.

[roninjin10]

I updated it to keep the channel open as discussed. Currently getting a Stack too deep error though.