Make sure we've actually confirmed the HTLC; if it's not confirmed yet
then we won't fast-fail it, and we'll timeout instead:
```
> l1.rpc.waitsendpay(payment_hash=inv['payment_hash'], timeout=TIMEOUT, partid=1)
E AssertionError: Pattern 'WIRE_PERMANENT_CHANNEL_FAILURE \\(reply from remote\\)' not found in "RPC call failed: method: waitsendpay, payload: {'payment_hash': 'c186643391469aa8190415496c85b1eb789cb2b756a76d4c9ce21dd34c698d92', 'timeout': 30, 'partid': 1}, error: {'code': 200, 'message': 'Timed out while waiting'}"
```
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The status of what started as a simple JSON-RPC call is now spread across an
entire tree of partial payments and payment attempts. So we collect the status
in a single struct in order to report back success of failure.
This commit can be reverted/skipped once we have implemented all the logic and
have feature parity with the normal `pay`. It's main purpose is to expose the
unfinished functionality to test it, without completely breaking the existing
`pay` command.
We've been seeing some Travis timeouts under VALGRIND, with the
10 second timeout here: use TIMEOUT as per standard.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
And the percentage of the initial amount, not the constently increasing
one !
Changelog-Fixed: pay: we now respect maxfeepercent, even for tiny amounts.
Signed-off-by: Antoine Poinsot <darosior@protonmail.com>
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.
The documentation was wrong, and I copied my mistake to `libplugin` where it
was then ignored instead of ORed into the node's featurebits. This fixes both.
We weren't actually waiting until l3 got the channel_update from l2,
so it might not be able to create the routehint.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
When route returns a result which is too expensive, we try to figure out which
hop is most expensive to exclude it for next time.
If it's a single-hop route, we don't count it, since the first hop is free.
That's not usually a problem, since single-hop routes can't exceed our limits
(they're always "free"!).
But if we are using a routehint, the total cost could exceed our limits,
even if the start of the routehint is a single hop away.
This reproduces that test case.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is what actually lets us pay blinded invoices.
Unfortunately, our internal logic assumes every hop in a path has a
next `short_channel_id`, so we have to use a dummy. This is
sufficient for testing, however.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Sending update_fee immediately after channel establishment seems to
upset LND, so work around it by deferring it. The reason we increase
the fee after establishment is because now we might need to close the
channel in a hurry due to htlcs, but until there are htlcs that's
unnecessary.
Fixes: #3596
Changelog-Changed: Added workaround for lnd rejecting our commitment_signed when we send an update_fee after channel confirmed.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The spec states that invoices with an amount, but lacking a multiplier, should
be interpreted as integer Bitcoin amounts:
`amount`: optional number in that currency, followed by an optional
`multiplier` letter. The unit encoded here is the 'social' convention of a
payment unit -- in the case of Bitcoin the unit is 'bitcoin' NOT satoshis.
Suggested-by: Stefano Pellegrini <@St333p>
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <@cdecker>
Changelog-Fixed: invoice: The invoice parser assumed that an amount without a multiplier was denominated in msatoshi instead of bitcoins.
A CONSERVATIVE/3 target for them.
Some noisy changes to the tests as we had to update the estimatesmartfee
mock.
Changelog-Changed: We now use a higher feerate for resolving onchain HTLCs and for penalty transactions
We are returning a `BADONION` error despite the cause being an invalid onion
payload containing an unknown even TLV type. It really should return
`INVALID_ONION_PAYLOAD` errors instead.
Add new check if we're funder trying to add HTLC, keeping us
with enough extra funds to pay for another HTLC the peer might add.
We also need to adjust the spendable_msat calculation, and update
various tests which try to unbalance channels. We eliminate
the now-redundant test_channel_drainage entirely.
Changelog-Fixed: Corner case where channel could become unusable (https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc/issues/728)
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Using it with a different value to the amount sent causes a crash in 0.8.0,
which is effectively deprecating it, so let's disallow it now.
Changelog-Changed: If the optional `msatoshi` param to sendpay for non-MPP is set, it must be the exact amount sent to the final recipient.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Changelog-Fixed: Detect a previously non-permanent error (`final_cltv_too_soon`) that has been merged into a permanent error (`incorrect_or_unknown_payment_details`), and retry that failure case in `pay`.
We still close the channel if we *send* an error, but we seem to have hit
another case where LND sends an error which seems transient, so this will
make a best-effort attempt to preserve our channel in that case.
Some test have to be modified, since they don't terminate as they did
previously :(
Changelog-Changed: quirks: We'll now reconnect and retry if we get an error on an established channel. This works around lnd sending error messages that may be non-fatal.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Thanks to @t-bast, who made this possible by interop testing with Eclair!
Changelog-Added: Protocol: can now send and receive TLV-style onion messages.
Changelog-Added: Protocol: can now send and receive BOLT11 payment_secrets.
Changelog-Added: Protocol: can now receive basic multi-part payments.
Changelog-Added: RPC: low-level commands sendpay and waitsendpay can now be used to manually send multi-part payments.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Bastien TEINTURIER <bastien@acinq.fr> writes:
> It looks like the split on c-lightning side is quite limited at the moment:
> the only option is to split a payment in exactly its two halves,
> otherwise I get rejected because of the rule of overpaying more than
> twice the amount?
We only tested exactly two equal-size payments; indeed, our finalhop
test was backwards. We only complain if the final hop pays more than
twice msat (technically, this test is still too loose for mpp: the
spec says we should sum to the exact amount).
Reported-by: @t-bast
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This won't usually be visible to the end-user, since the pay plugin doesn't
do multi-part yet (and mpp requires EXPERIMENTAL_FEATURES), but we're ready
once it does.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Christian Decker
Rusty Russell
ZmnSCPxj jxPCSnmZ
Antoine Poinsot
lisa neigut
Michael Schmoock