<p>Looking at the output of the <a href="https://api.lightning.community/api/lnd/lightning/describe-graph/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">describeGraph</a> command of my node (LND), I have seen that my node detects approximately 19,000 nodes. Of those 19 thousand, 6 thousand do not report any bolt9 feature.</p>
<pre><code>lnd@node:~$ lncli describegraph | grep -c &quot;features&quot;            
18969
lnd@node:~$ lncli describegraph | grep -A 1 &quot;features&quot; | grep -c }
6274
</code></pre>
<p>Is there any logical reason why this could happen? I thought it was mandatory to report the features that are implemented in order to use the protocol correctly.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-08T08:32:17.560Z
Could it be that those 6 thousand nodes are running older versions and might not support certain features or report them correctly? or some nodes might be using non-compliant implementations that don't report BOLT #9 features at all?
deyw
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-09T10:34:28.743Z
@deyw It could be, at first I thought of nodes that work with smartphones. It remains to be seen even if these nodes are really useful for the network. Because if they are not, the LN numbers are far worse than they might first appear.
polespinasa
<lightning-network><lightning-network-daemon><ln-gossip>
Lightning Network Nodes do not report Bolt9 Features
polespinasa
# Lightning Network Nodes do not report Bolt9 Features

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-01-30)

Looking at the output of the describeGraph command of my node (LND), I have seen that my node detects approximately 19,000 nodes. Of those 19 thousand, 6 thousand do not report any bolt9 feature.
lnd@node:~$ lncli describegraph | grep -c "features"            
18969
lnd@node:~$ lncli describegraph | grep -A 1 "features" | grep -c }
6274

Is there any logical reason why this could happen? I thought it was mandatory to report the features that are implemented in order to use the protocol correctly.

**Tags:** lightning-network, lightning-network-daemon, ln-gossip

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Could it be that those 6 thousand nodes are running older versions and might not support certain features or report them correctly? or some nodes might be using non-compliant implementations that don't report BOLT #9 features at all?  
> **username_0**: @username_1 It could be, at first I thought of nodes that work with smartphones. It remains to be seen even if these nodes are really useful for the network. Because if they are not, the LN numbers are far worse than they might first appear.  

---

## 0 answers

