mirrors/rust-lightning
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/lightningdevkit/rust-lightning.git synced 2025-02-25 07:17:40 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Don't underpay htlc_min due to path contribution

Browse source 
We could have possibly constructed a slightly inconsistent
path: since we reduce value being transferred all the way, we
could have violated htlc_minimum_msat on some channels
we already passed (assuming dest->source direction). Here,
we recompute the fees again, so that if that's the case, we
match the currently underpaid htlc_minimum_msat with fees.
This commit is contained in:
Gleb Naumenko 2021-03-01 12:37:51 +02:00
parent 18c7730040
commit e0600e5b1e
1 changed files with 33 additions and 9 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

42
lightning/src/routing/router.rs
View file

@ -221,15 +221,19 @@ impl PaymentPath {
return result;
}
// If an amount transferred by the path is updated, the fees should be adjusted. Any other way
// to change fees may result in an inconsistency. Also, it's only safe to reduce the value,
// to not violate channel upper bounds.
// If the amount transferred by the path is updated, the fees should be adjusted. Any other way
// to change fees may result in an inconsistency.
//
// Sometimes we call this function right after constructing a path which has inconsistent
// (in terms of reaching htlc_minimum_msat), so that this function puts the fees in order.
// In that case we call it on the "same" amount we initially allocated for this path, and which
// could have been reduced on the way. In that case, there is also a risk of exceeding
// available_liquidity inside this function, because the function is unaware of this bound.
// In our specific recomputation cases where we never increase the value the risk is pretty low.
// This function, however, does not support arbitrarily increasing the value being transferred,
// and the exception will be triggered.
fn update_value_and_recompute_fees(&mut self, value_msat: u64) {
if value_msat == self.hops.last().unwrap().route_hop.fee_msat {
// Nothing to change.
return;
}
assert!(value_msat < self.hops.last().unwrap().route_hop.fee_msat);
assert!(value_msat <= self.hops.last().unwrap().route_hop.fee_msat);
let mut total_fee_paid_msat = 0 as u64;
for i in (0..self.hops.len()).rev() {
@ -251,6 +255,14 @@ impl PaymentPath {
// match htlc_minimum_msat logic.
let mut cur_hop_transferred_amount_msat = total_fee_paid_msat + value_msat;
if let Some(extra_fees_msat) = cur_hop.htlc_minimum_msat.checked_sub(cur_hop_transferred_amount_msat) {
// Note that there is a risk that *previous hops* (those closer to us, as we go
// payee->our_node here) would exceed their htlc_maximum_msat or available balance.
//
// This might make us end up with a broken route, although this should be super-rare
// in practice, both because of how healthy channels look like, and how we pick
// channels in add_entry.
// Also, this can't be exploited more heavily than *announce a free path and fail
// all payments*.
cur_hop_transferred_amount_msat += extra_fees_msat;
total_fee_paid_msat += extra_fees_msat;
cur_hop_fees_msat += extra_fees_msat;
@ -490,6 +502,10 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
// as not sufficient.
// TODO: Explore simply adding fee to hit htlc_minimum_msat
if contributes_sufficient_value && amount_to_transfer_over_msat >= $directional_info.htlc_minimum_msat {
// Note that low contribution here (limited by available_liquidity_msat)
// might violate htlc_minimum_msat on the hops which are next along the
// payment path (upstream to the payee). To avoid that, we recompute path
// path fees knowing the final path contribution after constructing it.
let hm_entry = dist.entry(&$src_node_id);
let old_entry = hm_entry.or_insert_with(|| {
// If there was previously no known way to access
@ -796,7 +812,15 @@ pub fn get_route<L: Deref>(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye
ordered_hops.last_mut().unwrap().hop_use_fee_msat = 0;
ordered_hops.last_mut().unwrap().route_hop.cltv_expiry_delta = final_cltv;
let payment_path = PaymentPath {hops: ordered_hops};
let mut payment_path = PaymentPath {hops: ordered_hops};
// We could have possibly constructed a slightly inconsistent path: since we reduce
// value being transferred along the way, we could have violated htlc_minimum_msat
// on some channels we already passed (assuming dest->source direction). Here, we
// recompute the fees again, so that if that's the case, we match the currently
// underpaid htlc_minimum_msat with fees.
payment_path.update_value_and_recompute_fees(value_contribution_msat);
// Since a path allows to transfer as much value as
// the smallest channel it has ("bottleneck"), we should recompute
// the fees so sender HTLC don't overpay fees when traversing