These are generalized from our internal implementations.
The main difference is that 'struct json_escaped' is now 'struct
json_escape', so we replace that immediately.
The difference between lightningd's json-writing ringbuffer and the
more generic ccan/json_out is that the latter has a better API and
handles escaping transparently if something slips through (though
it does offer direct accessors so you can mess things up yourself!).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We seek a certain number of peers at each level of gossip; 3 "flood"
if we're missing gossip, 2 at 24 hours past to catch recent gossip, and
8 with current gossip. The rest are given a filter which causes them
not to gossip to us at all.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The first sign that we're missing gossip is that we get a channel_update
for an unknown channel. The peer might be wrong (or lying), but if it turns
out to be a real channel, we were definitely missing something.
This patch does two things: queries when we get an unknown channel_update,
and then notes that a channel_announcement was from such an update when
it's finally processed.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In particular, we'll need to know the short_channel_id if a
channel_update is unknown (implies we're missing a channel), and whether
processing a pending channel_announcement was successful (implies that
the channel was real).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Up until now we only generated these in dev mode for testing. Hoist
into common code, turn counter into a flag (we're only allowed one!)
and note if query is internal or not.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I decided to try a faster implementation, only to find our crc32c was
not correct! Ouch.
I removed the crc32c functions from ccan/crc, and added a new crc32c
module which has the Mark Adler x86-64-optimized variants.
We bump gossip_store version again, since csums have changed.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This new parameter takes a list of outpoints (as txid:vout) and fund a channel from the corresponding utxos.
Example : fundchannel <id> 10000 normal 1 [10767f0db0e568127fffd7f70a154d4599f42d62babf63230a7c3378bfce3cb0:0, c9e040e0b5fc8c59d5e7834108fbc5583001f414dd83faf0a05cff9d1a92d32c:0]
Remove gratuitous prints, add explanations of what's going on,
and demonstrate that we can add a final trimmed HTLC but not
a non-trimmed one.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We track whether each change is affordable as we go;
test_channel_drainage got us so close that the difference mattered; we
hit an assert when we tried to commit the tx and realized we couldn't
afford it.
We should not be trying to add an HTLC if it will result in the funder
being unable to afford it on either the local *or remote* commitments.
Note the test still "fails" because it refuses to send the final
payment.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subtracting both arbitrarily reduces our capacity, even for ourselves
since the routing logic uses this maximum.
I also changed 'advertise' to 'advertize', since we use american
spelling.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This means there's now a semantic difference between the default `fromid`
and setting `fromid` explicitly to our own node_id. In the default case,
it means we don't charge ourselves fees on the route.
This means we can spend the full channel balance.
We still want to consider the pricing of local channels, however:
there's a *reason* to discount one over another, and that is to bias
things. So we add the first-hop fee to the *risk* value instead.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Take into account the fee we'd have to pay if we're the funder, and
also drop to 0 if the amount is less than the smallest HTLC the peer
will accept.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Turns out we needed more comprehensive testing; we ended up with three
separate tests. To avoid changing test_channel_drainage as we fix
spendable_msat, I substituted raw numbers there.
The first is a variation of the existing tests, testing we can't
exceed spendable_msat, and we can pay it, both ways.
The second is with a larger amount, which triggers a different problem.
The final is with a giant channel, which tests our 2^32-1 msat cap.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is where payment tests should go. Also mark it xfail for the moment,
and remove developer-only tag (propagating gossip is only 60 seconds, which
is OK).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
There were several gossip breakages in master; bumping version means
upgrades get a clean store (not just those upgrading from stable version).
Fixes: #2719
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This was incorrectly handled before, hence the wrapper which checks
correctness of the arguments.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
@pm47 gave a great bug report showing c-lightning sending the same
UPDATE_FEE over and over, with the final surprise result being that we
blamed the peer for sending us multiple empty commits!
The spam is caused by us checking "are we at the desired feerate?" but
then if we can't afford the desired feerate, setting the feerate we
can afford, even though it's a duplicate. Doing the feerate cap before
we test if it's what we have already eliminates this.
But the empty commits was harder to find: it's caused by a heuristic in
channel_rcvd_revoke_and_ack:
```
/* For funder, ack also means time to apply new feerate locally. */
if (channel->funder == LOCAL &&
(channel->view[LOCAL].feerate_per_kw
!= channel->view[REMOTE].feerate_per_kw)) {
status_trace("Applying feerate %u to LOCAL (was %u)",
channel->view[REMOTE].feerate_per_kw,
channel->view[LOCAL].feerate_per_kw);
channel->view[LOCAL].feerate_per_kw
= channel->view[REMOTE].feerate_per_kw;
channel->changes_pending[LOCAL] = true;
}
```
We assume we never send duplicates, so we detect an otherwise-empty
change using the difference in feerates. If we don't set this flag,
we will get upset if we receive a commitment_signed since we consider
there to be no changes to commit.
This is actually hard to test: the previous commit adds a test which
spams update_fee and doesn't trigger this bug, because both sides
use the same "there's nothing outstanding" logic.
Fixes: #2701
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is important for things we automatically watched because it spends a
watch txo, but only onchaind knows the details about what the TX really is and
how it should be handled.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
This takes the guesswork out of `drop_to_chain` and allows us to annotate the
last_tx consistently.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
Since we add the transactions while processing the blockchain, and before we
have enough context to annotate them correctly, i.e., in the txwatches, we add
them first and then annotate them aposteriori.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
Rusty Russell
darosior
Michael Schmoock
Michael Schmoock
Christian Decker