mirrors/lightning-bolts
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/lightning/bolts.git synced 2025-03-10 09:10:07 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

BOLT 7: correct the default min_final_cltv_expiry_delta in routing example (#1143)

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Trigger 2024-02-22 10:01:47 +01:00 • committed by GitHub
parent 8fc3ba9f0c
commit 60de4a0972
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
1 changed files with 9 additions and 9 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

18
07-routing-gossip.md
View file

@ -1069,7 +1069,7 @@ channel:
3. C: 30 blocks 3. C: 30 blocks
4. D: 40 blocks 4. D: 40 blocks
C also uses a `min_final_cltv_expiry_delta` of 9 (the default) when requesting C also uses a `min_final_cltv_expiry_delta` of 18 (the default) when requesting
payments. payments.
Also, each node has a set fee scheme that it uses for each of its Also, each node has a set fee scheme that it uses for each of its
@ -1093,16 +1093,16 @@ The network will see eight `channel_update` messages:
**B->C.** If B were to send 4,999,999 millisatoshi directly to C, it would **B->C.** If B were to send 4,999,999 millisatoshi directly to C, it would
neither charge itself a fee nor add its own `cltv_expiry_delta`, so it would neither charge itself a fee nor add its own `cltv_expiry_delta`, so it would
use C's requested `min_final_cltv_expiry_delta` of 9. Presumably it would also add a use C's requested `min_final_cltv_expiry_delta` of 18. Presumably it would also add a
_shadow route_ to give an extra CLTV of 42. Additionally, it could add extra _shadow route_ to give an extra CLTV of 42. Additionally, it could add extra
CLTV deltas at other hops, as these values represent a minimum, but chooses not CLTV deltas at other hops, as these values represent a minimum, but chooses not
to do so here, for the sake of simplicity: to do so here, for the sake of simplicity:
* `amount_msat`: 4999999 * `amount_msat`: 4999999
* `cltv_expiry`: current-block-height + 9 + 42 * `cltv_expiry`: current-block-height + 18 + 42
* `onion_routing_packet`: * `onion_routing_packet`:
* `amt_to_forward` = 4999999 * `amt_to_forward` = 4999999
* `outgoing_cltv_value` = current-block-height + 9 + 42 * `outgoing_cltv_value` = current-block-height + 18 + 42
**A->B->C.** If A were to send 4,999,999 millisatoshi to C via B, it needs to **A->B->C.** If A were to send 4,999,999 millisatoshi to C via B, it needs to
pay B the fee it specified in the B->C `channel_update`, calculated as pay B the fee it specified in the B->C `channel_update`, calculated as
@ -1113,14 +1113,14 @@ per [HTLC Fees](#htlc-fees):
200 + ( 4999999 * 2000 / 1000000 ) = 10199 200 + ( 4999999 * 2000 / 1000000 ) = 10199
Similarly, it would need to add B->C's `channel_update` `cltv_expiry_delta` (20), C's Similarly, it would need to add B->C's `channel_update` `cltv_expiry_delta` (20), C's
requested `min_final_cltv_expiry_delta` (9), and the cost for the _shadow route_ (42). requested `min_final_cltv_expiry_delta` (18), and the cost for the _shadow route_ (42).
Thus, A->B's `update_add_htlc` message would be: Thus, A->B's `update_add_htlc` message would be:
* `amount_msat`: 5010198 * `amount_msat`: 5010198
* `cltv_expiry`: current-block-height + 20 + 9 + 42 * `cltv_expiry`: current-block-height + 20 + 18 + 42
* `onion_routing_packet`: * `onion_routing_packet`:
* `amt_to_forward` = 4999999 * `amt_to_forward` = 4999999
* `outgoing_cltv_value` = current-block-height + 9 + 42 * `outgoing_cltv_value` = current-block-height + 18 + 42
B->C's `update_add_htlc` would be the same as B->C's direct payment above. B->C's `update_add_htlc` would be the same as B->C's direct payment above.
@ -1128,10 +1128,10 @@ B->C's `update_add_htlc` would be the same as B->C's direct payment above.
A->D's `update_add_htlc` message would be: A->D's `update_add_htlc` message would be:
* `amount_msat`: 5020398 * `amount_msat`: 5020398
* `cltv_expiry`: current-block-height + 40 + 9 + 42 * `cltv_expiry`: current-block-height + 40 + 18 + 42
* `onion_routing_packet`: * `onion_routing_packet`:
* `amt_to_forward` = 4999999 * `amt_to_forward` = 4999999
* `outgoing_cltv_value` = current-block-height + 9 + 42 * `outgoing_cltv_value` = current-block-height + 18 + 42
And D->C's `update_add_htlc` would again be the same as B->C's direct payment And D->C's `update_add_htlc` would again be the same as B->C's direct payment
above. above.