CounterpartyForwardingInfo is public (previously exposed with a
`pub use`), and used inside of ChannelCounterparty in
channelmanager.rs. However, it is defined in channel.rs, away from
where it is used.
This would be fine, except that the bindings generator is somewhat
confused by this - it doesn't currently support interpreting
`pub use` as a struct to expose, instead ignoring it.
Fixes https://github.com/lightningdevkit/ldk-garbagecollected/issues/44
When communicating the maximum fee we're willing to accept on a
cooperative closing transaction to our peer, we currently tell them
we'll accept `u64::max_value()` if they're the ones who have to pay
it. Spec-wise this is fine - they aren't allowed to try to claim
our balance, and we don't care how much of their own funds they
want to spend on transaction fees.
However, the Eclair folks prefer to check all values on the wire
do not exceed 21 million BTC, which seems like generally good
practice to avoid overflows and such issues. Thus, our close
messages are rejected by Eclair.
Here we simply relax our stated maximum to be the real value - our
counterparty's current balance in satoshis.
Fixes#1071
This adds the new range-based closing_signed negotiation specified
in https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc/pull/847 as
well as cleans up the existing closing_signed negotiation to unify
the new codepaths and the old ones.
Note that because the new range-based closing_signed negotiation
allows the channel fundee to ultimately select the fee out of a
range specified by the funder, which we, of course, always select
the highest allowed amount from. Thus, we've added an extra round
of closing_signed in the common case as we will not simply accept
the first fee we see, always preferring to make the funder pay as
much as they're willing to.
When we added the support for external signing, many of the
signing functions were allowed to return an error, closing the
channel in such a case. `sign_closing_transaction` is one such
function which can now return an error, except instead of handling
it properly we'd simply never send a `closing_signed` message,
hanging the channel until users intervene and force-close it.
Piping the channel-closing error back through the various callsites
(several of which already have pending results by the time they
call `maybe_propose_first_closing_signed`) may be rather
complicated, so instead we simply attempt to propose the initial
`closing_signed` in `get_and_clear_pending_msg_events` like we do
for holding-cell freeing.
Further, since we now (possibly) generate a `ChannelMonitorUpdate`
on `shutdown`, we may need to wait for monitor updating to complete
before we can send a `closing_signed`, meaning we need to handle
the send asynchronously anyway.
This simplifies a few function interfaces and has no impact on
behavior, aside from a few message-ordering edge-cases, as seen in
the two small test changes required.
We're supposed to write `Channel` to disk as if
`remove_uncommitted_htlcs_and_mark_paused` had just run, however we
were writing `last_sent_closing_fee` to disk (if it is not-None),
whereas `remove_uncommitted_htlcs_and_mark_paused` clears it.
Indeed, the BOLTs say fee "... negotiation restarts on
reconnection."
We don't actually yet support `warning` messages as there are
issues left to resolve in the spec PR, but there's nothing to stop
us adding an internal enum variant for sending a warning message
before we actually support doing so.
Inbound fee udpates are rather broken in lightning as they can
impact the non-fundee despite the funder paying the fee, but only
in the dust exposure it places on the fundee.
At least lnd is fairly aggressively high in their (non-anchor) fee
estimation, running the risk of force-closure. Further, because we
relied on a fee estimator we don't have full control over, we
were assuming our users' fees are particularly conservative, and
thus were at a lot of risk to force-closures.
This converts our fee limiting to use an absurd upper bound,
focusing on whether we are over-exposed to in-flight dust when we
receive an update_fee.
If we receive an update_fee but do not receive a commitment_signed,
we should not persist the pending fee update to disk or hold on to
it after our peer disconnects.
In order to make the code the most readable, we add a state enum
which matches the relevant states from InboundHTLCState, allowing
for more simple code comparison between inbound HTLC handling and
update_fee handling.
When we send an update_fee to our counterparty on an outbound
channel, if we need to re-send a commitment update after
reconnection, the update_fee must be present in the re-sent
commitment update messages. However, wewere always setting the
update_fee field in the commitment update to None, causing us to
generate invalid commitment signatures and get channel
force-closures.
This fixes the issue by correctly detecting when an update_fee
needs to be re-sent, doing so when required.
Previously we'd been expecting to implement anchor outputs before
shipping 0.1, thus reworking our channel fee update process
entirely and leaving it as a future task. However, due to the
difficulty of working with on-chain anchor pools, we are now likely
to ship 0.1 without requiring anchor outputs.
In either case, there isn't a lot of reason to require that users
call an explicit "prevailing feerates have changed" function now
that we have a timer method which is called regularly. Further, we
really should be the ones deciding on the channel feerate in terms
of the users' FeeEstimator, instead of requiring users implement a
second fee-providing interface by calling an update_fee method.
Finally, there is no reason for an update_fee method to be
channel-specific, as we should be updating all (outbound) channel
fees at once.
Thus, we move the update_fee handling to the background, calling it
on the regular 1-minute timer. We also update the regular 1-minute
timer to fire on startup as well as every minute to ensure we get
fee updates even on mobile clients that are rarely, if ever, open
for more than one minute.
At `update_add_htlc()`/`send_htlc()`, we verify that the inbound/
outbound dust or the sum of both, on either sides of the link isn't
above new config setting `max_balance_dust_htlc_msat`.
A dust HTLC is hence defined as a trimmed-to-dust one, i.e including
the fee cost to publish its claiming transaction.
When a shutdown script is omitted from open_channel or accept_channel,
it must be provided when sending shutdown. Generate the shutdown script
at channel closing time in this case rather at channel opening.
This requires producing a ChannelMonitorUpdate with the shutdown script
since it is no longer known at ChannelMonitor creation.
KeysInterface::get_shutdown_pubkey is used to form P2WPKH shutdown
scripts. However, BOLT 2 allows for a wider variety of scripts. Refactor
KeysInterface to allow any supported script while still maintaining
serialization backwards compatibility with P2WPKH script pubkeys stored
simply as the PublicKey.
Add an optional TLV field to Channel and ChannelMonitor to support the
new format, but continue to serialize the legacy PublicKey format.
It is useful for accounting and informational reasons for users to
be informed when a payment has been successfully forwarded. Thus,
when an HTLC which represents a forwarded leg is claimed, we
generate a new `PaymentForwarded` event.
This requires some additional plumbing to return HTLC values from
`OnchainEvent`s. Further, when we have to go on-chain to claim the
inbound side of the payment, we do not inform the user of the fee
reward, as we cannot calculate it until we see what is confirmed
on-chain.
Substantial code structure rewrites by:
Valentine Wallace <vwallace@protonmail.com>
Previously, we could fail to generate a new commitment transaction
but it simply indicated we had gone to doule-claim an HTLC. Now
that double-claims are returned instead as Ok(None), we should
handle the error case and fail the channel, as the only way to hit
the error case is if key derivation failed or the user refused to
sign the new commitment transaction.
This also resolves an issue where we wouldn't inform our
ChannelMonitor of the new payment preimage in case we failed to
fetch a signature for the new commitment transaction.
When receiving an update_fulfill_htlc message, we immediately
forward the claim backwards along the payment path before waiting
for a full commitment_signed dance. This is great, but can cause
duplicative claims if a node sends an update_fulfill_htlc message,
disconnects, reconnects, and then has to re-send its
update_fulfill_htlc message again.
While there was code to handle this, it treated it as a channel
error on the inbound channel, which is incorrect - this is an
expected, albeit incredibly rare, condition. Instead, we handle
these double-claims correctly, simply ignoring them.
With debug_assertions enabled, we also check that the previous
close of the same HTLC was a fulfill, and that we are not moving
from a HTLC failure to an HTLC claim after its too late.
A test is also added, which hits all three failure cases in
`Channel::get_update_fulfill_htlc`.
Found by the chanmon_consistency fuzzer.
