This was included in the lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc#105 update
to the test vectors, and it's a good idea. Takes a bit of work to
calculate (particularly, being aware of rounding issues).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
aka "BOLT 3: Use revocation key hash rather than revocation key",
which builds on top of lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc#105 "BOLT 2,3,5:
Make htlc outputs of the commitment tx spendable with revocation key".
This affects callers, since they now need to hand us the revocation
pubkey, but commit_tx has that already anyway.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
All the daemons will use a common seed for point derivation, so drag
it out of lightningd/opening.
This also provide a nice struct wrapper to reduce argument count.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We should start watching for the transaction before we send the
signature; we might miss it otherwise. In practice, we only see
transactions as they enter a block, so it won't happen, but be
thorough.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is a bit tricky: for our signing code, we don't want scriptsigs,
but to calculate the txid, we need them. For most transactions in lightning,
they're pure segwit so it doesn't matter, but funding transactions can
have P2SH-wrapped P2WPKH inputs.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
built_utxos needs to calculate fees for figuring out how many utxos to
use, so fix that logic and rely on it.
We make build_utxos return a pointer array, so funding_tx can simply hand
that to permute_inputs.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The spec 4af8e1841151f0c6e8151979d6c89d11839b2f65 uses a 32-byte 'channel-id'
field, not to be confused with the 8-byte short ID used by gossip. Rename
appropriately, and update to the new handshake protocol.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We use a different 'struct peer' in the new daemons, so make sure
the structure isn't assumed in any shared files.
This is a temporary shim.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Only minor changes, but I add some more spec text to
lightningd/test/run-commit_tx.c to be sure to catch if it changes
again.
One reference isn't upstream yet, so had to be commented out.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Now we've tested it:
1. open_channel needs to write response to REQ_FD not STATUS_FD.
2. recv_channel needs to send our next_per_commit, not echo theirs!
3. print the problematic signature if it's wrong, not our own.
Cleanups:
1. Return the message from open_channel/recv_channel for simplicity.
2. Trace signing information.
3. More tracing messages.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The signing helper was really just for testing, so remove it. But
turn the funding_tx() function into a useful one by making it take the
utxo array.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I made it privkey to prove we owned one key, but without the HSM checking
we have a valid sig for the first commitment transaction, and that
we haven't revealed the revocation secret key, why bother?
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Or for blackbox tests --gdb1=<subdaemon> / --gdb2=<subdaemon>.
This makes the subdaemon wait as soon as it's execed, so we can attach
the debugger.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We should check that the peer it says it's returning is under its control,
we need to take back the peer fd, and use the correct conversion routine
for the packet it sends us.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
For the moment this is simply handed through to lightningd for
generating the per-peer secrets; eventually the HSM should keep it and
all peer secret key operations would be done via HSM-ops.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Raw crypto_state is what we send across the wire: the peer one is for
use in async crypto io routines (peer_read_message/peer_write_message).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The requirements for accepting the remote config are more complex than
a simple min/max value, as various parameters are related. It turns
out that with a few assumptions, we can boil this down to:
1. The valid feerate range.
2. The minimum effective HTLC throughput we want
3. The a maximum delay we'll accept for us to redeem.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Unless the transaction is confirmed, the UTXOs should be released if
something happens to the peer.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell