We have an incompatibility with lnd it seems: I've lost channels on
reconnect with 'sync error'. Since I never got this code to be reliable,
disable it for next release since I suspect it's our fault :(
And reenable the check which didn't work, for others to untangle.
I couldn't get option_data_loss_protect to be reliable, and I disabled
the check. This was a mistake, I should have either spent even more
time trying to get to the bottom of this (especially, writing test
vectors for the spec and testing against other implementations).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Because gossip in this case takes up to a minute, this test took 10
minutes. The workaround is to do the waiting-for-gossip all at once.
Now it takes 362 seconds.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
After Ubuntu 18.10 upgrade, lots of new flake8 warnings.
$ flake8 --version:
3.5.0 (mccabe: 0.6.1, pycodestyle: 2.4.0, pyflakes: 1.6.0) CPython 3.6.7rc1 on Linux
Note it seems that W503 warned about line breaks before binary
operators, and W504 complains about them after. I prefer W504, so
disable W503.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
When the wrong key is used, the remote end simply hangs up.
We used to get a random errno, which tends to be "Operation now in progress."
Now it's defined to be 0, detect and provide a better error.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We don't save them to the database, so fix things up as we load them.
Next patch will actually save them into the db, and this will become
COMPAT code.
Also: call htlc_in_check() with NULL on db load, as otherwise it aborts
internally.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Usually, we only close an incoming HTLC once the outgoing HTLC is completely
resolved. However, we short-cut this in the FULFILL case: we have the
preimage, so might as well use it immediately (in fact, we wait for it to
be committed, but we don't need to in theory).
As a side-effect of this, our assumption that every outgoing HTLC has
a corresponding incoming HTLC is incorrect, and this test (xfail) tickles
that corner case.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
It's an array: we were only saving the single element; if there was more than
one changed HTLC we'd get a bad signature!
The report in #1907 is probably caused by the other side re-requesting
something we considered already finalized; to avoid this particular error,
we should set the field to NULL if there's no last_sent_commit.
I'm increasingly of the opinion we want to just save all the update
packets to the db and blast them out, instead of doing this
second-guessing dance.
Fixes: #1907
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
1. Wait for a 'sendrawtransaction' *after* the dev-fail message; don't be
fooled by a previous one.
2. Turning on estimate fee sets fees exactly; just wait for it to be processed.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
And, reluctantly, default to bitcoind style.
"It's wrong to be right too soon."
Suggested-by: @cdecker
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The comment was wrong: the channel being locked in was triggering
the fee update and hence the disconnect. But that can actually
happen before fund_channel returns, as that waits for the gossipd
to see the channel active.
Best to do the fee update manually, so it's exactly what we want.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We use feerate in several places, and each one really should react
differently when it's not available (such as when bitcoind is still
catching up):
1. For general fee-enforcement, we use the broadest possible limits.
2. For closingd, we use it as our opening negotiation point: just use half
the last tx feerate.
3. For onchaind, we can use the last tx feerate as a guide for our own txs;
it might be too high, but at least we know it was sufficient to be mined.
4. For withdraw and fund_channel, we can simply refuse.
Fixes: #1836
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Manipulate fees via fake-bitcoin-cli. It's not quite the same, as
these are pre-smoothing, so we need a restart to override that where
we really need an exact change. Or we can wait until it reaches a
certain value in cases we don't care about exact amounts.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We don't respond to fee changes until we're locked in: make sure we catch
up at that point.
Note that we use NORMAL fees during opening, but IMMEDIATE after, so
this often sends a fee update. The tests which break, we set those
feerates to be equal.
This (sometimes) changes the behavior of test_permfail, as we now
get an immediate commit, so that is fixed too so we always wait for
that to complete.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is a noop if we're opening a new channel (channel_fees_can_change(channel)
is false until funding locked in), but important if we're restarting.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
When in this state, we send a canned error "Awaiting unilateral close".
We enter this both when we drop to chain, and when we're trying to get
them to drop to chain due to option_data_loss_protect.
As this state (unlike channel errors) is saved to the database, it means
we will *never* talk to a peer again in this state, so they can't
confuse us.
Since we set this state in channel_fail_permanent() (which is the only
place we call drop_to_chain for a unilateral close), we don't need to
save to the db: channel_set_state() does that for us.
This state change has a subtle effect: we return WIRE_UNKNOWN_NEXT_PEER
instead of WIRE_TEMPORARY_CHANNEL_FAILURE as soon as we get a failure
with a peer. To provoke a temporary failure in test_pay_disconnect we
take the node offline.
Reported-by: Christian Decker @cdecker
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This means we don't try to unilaterally close after a restart, *and*
we can tell onchaind to try to use the point to recover funds when the
peer unilaterally closes.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Firstly, if they claim to know a future value, we ask the HSM; if
they're right, we tell master what the per-commitment-secret it gave
us (we have no way to validate this, though) and it will not broadcast
a unilateral (knowing it will cause them to use a penalty tx!).
Otherwise, we check the results they sent were valid. The spec says
to do this (and close the channel if it's wrong!), because otherwise they
could continually lie and give us a bad per-commitment-secret when we
actually need it.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We ignore incoming for now, but this means we advertize the option and
we send the required fields.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
peer features are only kept for connected peers (as they can change),
but we didn't update them on reconnect. The main effect was that
after a restart we displayed the features as empty, even after
reconnect.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
1. l1 update_fee -> l2
2. l1 commitment_signed -> l2 (using new feerate)
3. l1 <- revoke_and_ack l2
4. l1 <- commitment_signed l2 (using new feerate)
5. l1 -> revoke_and_ack l2
When we break the connection after #3, the reconnection causes #4 to
be retransmitted, but it turns out l1 wasn't telling the master to set
the local feerate until it received the commitment_signed, so on
reconnect it uses the old feerate, with predictable results (bad
signature).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We're going to use it to override specific commands. It's non-valgrinded
already since we use '--trace-children-skip=*bitcoin-cli*' so the overhead
should be minimal.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In one case, the channel_update which we expected to activate the channel
from l2 was suppressed as redundant. This is certainly valid, so just
check the results.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Christian Decker
lisa neigut
Rusty Russell