When doing the random walk through the channel, we now add the fees
(both the base and the proportional one) for that channel in addition to
the cltv delta.
Changelog-Added: Payment amount fuzzing is restored, but through shadow routing.
The string cut & paste hack was nasty; make ->failure a json_out
object so we can splice it in properly.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We now hand around struct json_out members, rather than using formatted
strings, so plugins need to construct them properly.
There's no automatic conversion between ' and " any more, so those
are eliminated too. pay still uses some manual construction of elements.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I tried to just do gossipd, but it was uncontainable, so this ended up being
a complete sweep.
We didn't get much space saving in gossipd, even though we should save
24 bytes per node.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
*best is checked for null before the comparison against the uninitialized
variable ever happens, so this isn't a real issue.
Initialize it to zero so that we don't fail to compile on certain gcc versions.
plugins/pay.c: In function ‘add_shadow_route’:
plugins/pay.c:644:18: error: ‘sample’ may be used uninitialized in this function
if (!best || v > sample) {
~~^~~~~~~~
Signed-off-by: William Casarin <jb55@jb55.com>
New name is less confusing, and most people should be transitioning to
listpays rather than this anyway.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is to future-proof against multi-part-payments: the low-level commands
will start returning multiple results once we have that, so prepare
transition plan now.
Closes: #2372
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is the same deprecation, but one level up. For the moment, we
still support invoices with a `h` field (where description will be
necessary) but that will be removed once this option is removed.
Note that I just changed pylightning without backwards compatibility,
since the field was unlikely to be used, but we could do something
more complex here?
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We need to do it in various places, but we shouldn't do it lightly:
the primitives are there to help us get overflow handling correct.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is particularly interesting because we handle overflow during route
calculation now; this could happen in theory once we wumbo.
It fixes a thinko when we print out routehints, too: we want to print
them out literally, not print out the effect they have on fees (which
is in the route, which we also print).
This ABI change doesn't need a CHANGELOG, since paystatus is new since
release.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We need to still accept it when parsing the database, but this flag
should allow upgrade testing for devs building on top
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Up until now, riskfactor was useless due to implementation bugs, and
also the default setting is wrong (too low to have an effect on
reasonable payment scenarios).
Let's simplify the definition (by assuming that P(failure) of a node
is 1), to make it a simple percentage. I examined the current network
fees to see what would work, and under this definition, a default of
10 seems reasonable (equivalent to 1000 under the old definition).
It is *this* change which finally fixes our test case! The riskfactor
is now 40msat (1500000 * 14 * 10 / 5259600 = 39.9), comparable with
worst-case fuzz is 50msat (1001 * 0.05 = 50).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is the direct cause of the failure of the original
test_pay_direct test and it makes sense: invoice routehints may not be
necessary, so try without them *first* rather than last.
We didn't mention the use of routehints in CHANGELOG at all yet, so
do that now.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Christian points out that we can iterate by ->size rather than calling
json_next() to find the end (which traverses the entire object!).
Now ->size is reliable (since previous patch), this is OK.
Reported-by: @cdecker
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Avoid the unnecessary extra var, and don't use "capacity" since
that usually refers to static capacity.
Reported-by: @cdecker
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
So add a new 'strategy' field. This makes it clearer what is going
on, currently one of:
* "Initial attempt"
* "Excluded channel <scid>"
* "Removed route hint"
* "Excluded expensive channel <scid>"
* "Excluded delaying channel <scid>"
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
