We did this originally because these types are referred to in the bolts, and we
had no way of injecting the correct include lines into those. Now we do, so
there's less excuse for this.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
It's possible for our peer to publish a commitment tx that has already
updated our balance for an htlc before we've completed removing it from
our commitment tx (aka before we've updated our balance). This used to
crash, now we just update our balance (and the channel balance logs!)
and keep going.
If they've removed anything from our balance, we'll end up counting it
as chain_fees below. Not ideal but fine... probably.
Previously we were annotating every movement with the blockheight of
lightningd at notification time. Which is lossy in terms of info, and
won't be helpful for reorg reconciliation. Here we switch over to
logging chain moves iff they've been confirmed.
Next PR will fix this up for withdrawals, which are currently tagged
with a blockheight of zero, since we log on successful send.
On node start we replay onchaind's transactions from the database/from
our loaded htlc table. To keep things tidy, we shouldn't notify the
ledger about these, so we wrap pretty much everything in a flag that
tells us whether or not this is a replay.
There's a very small corner case where dust transactions will get missed
if the node crashes after the htlc has been added to the database but
before we've successfully notified onchaind about it.
Notably, most of the obtrusive updates to onchaind wrappings are due to
the fact that we record dust (ignored outputs) before we receive
confirmation of its confirmation.
We record htlcs when they're fulfilled as 'withdrawals' that are
onchain. This should make use of the payment_hash that we stashed.
Additionally, if an htlc spend comes through that's not ours, it's
probably them resolving our attempted cheat; we should allow it to
proceed without bombing, and just do our accounting as necessary. It'll
all come out in the wash.
For cheats, we do a little bit of weird accounting. First we 'update'
our on-ledger balance to be the entirety of the channel's balance. Then,
as outputs get resolved, we record the fees and outputs as withdrawals
from this amount.
It's possible that they might successfully 'cheat', in which case we
record those as 'penalty' but debits (not credits).
Ignored outputs don't end up in the same 'resolved' pathway as other
tracked outputs do, so we mark them as moved when proposed/broadcast
instead of when resolved (since they'll never flow through as resolved)
I noticed the following in logs for tests/test_connection.py::test_feerate_stress:
```
DEBUG 022d223620a359a47ff7f7ac447c85c46c923da53389221a0054c11c1e3ca31d59-chan#1: Failing HTLC 18446744073709551615 due to peer death
DEBUG 022d223620a359a47ff7f7ac447c85c46c923da53389221a0054c11c1e3ca31d59-chan#1: local_routing_failure: 8194 (WIRE_TEMPORARY_NODE_FAILURE)
```
This is because it reports the (transient) node_failure error, because
our channel_failure message is incomplete. Fix this wart up.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Previously we've used the term 'funder' to refer to the peer
paying the fees for a transaction; v2 of openchannel will make
this no longer true. Instead we rename this to 'opener', or the
peer sending the 'open_channel' message, since this will be universally
true in a dual-funding world.
This allows us to set more fine-grained feerate for onchain resolution.
We still give it the same feerate for all types, but this will change as
we move feerates to bcli.
This sets the nLockTime to the tip (and accordingly each input's nSequence to
0xfffffffe) for withdrawal transactions.
Even if the anti fee-sniping argument might not be valid until some time yet,
this makes our regular wallet transactions far less distinguishable from
bitcoind's ones since it now defaults to using native Segwit transactions
(like us). Moreover other wallets are likely to implement this (if they
haven't already).
Changelog-Added: wallet: withdrawal transactions now sets nlocktime to the current tip.
This makes it clear we're dealing with a message which is a wrapped error
reply (needing unwrap_onionreply), not an already-wrapped one.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is ignored in subdaemons which are per-peer, but very useful for
multi-peer daemons like connectd and gossipd.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Currently the only source for amount_asset is the value getter on a tx output,
and we don't hand it too far around (mainly ignoring it if it isn't the
chain's main currency). Eventually we could bubble them up to the wallet, use
them to select outputs or actually support assets in the channels.
Since we don't hand them around too widely I thought it was ok for them to be
pass-by-value rather than having to allocate them and pass them around by
reference. They're just 41 bytes currently so the overhead should be ok.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <@cdecker>
We now have a pointer to chainparams, that fails valgrind if we do anything
chain-specific before setting it.
Suggested-by: Rusty Russell <@rustyrussell>
We used to match specifically on `is_elements && coinbase`, but we can just
hand off responsibility to libwally and then make sure we handle it correctly.
Turns out that if we have the init message contain both the chainparams as
well as a transaction that needs to be parsed we need to set the parser to
elements mode before we reach the transaction...
This is the main reason we started weaving the chainparams everywhere: being
able to compare the asset type with the fee paying asset tag, thus determining
the value of the asset correctly (we still treat any non-fee-paying assets as
having value 0).
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
531c8d7d9b
In this one, we always send my_current_per_commitment_point, though it's
ignored. And we have our official feature numbers.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The largest change is inside hsmd: it hands a null per-commitment key
to the wallet to tell it to spend the to_remote output.
It can also now resolve unknown commitments, even if it doesn't have a
possible_remote_per_commitment_point from the peer.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell
lisa neigut
darosior
Christian Decker