New name is less confusing, and most people should be transitioning to
listpays rather than this anyway.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We want to disallow using unconfirmed outputs by default, so making the
default 1 confirmation seems a good idea. This also matches `bitcoind`s
minimum confirmation requirement.
Arming however breaks some of our tests, so I used `minconf=0` for the
breaking tests and added a new test specifically for the `minconf` parameter
for `fundchannel`.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
An uncommitted channel should not keep the peer in the db, since the
uncommitted channel isn't in the db itself.
Fixes: #2367
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
- result fundchannel command now depends on successful or failed broadcast of the funding tx
- failure returns error code FUNDING_BROADCAST_FAIL
- don't fail the channel when broadcast failed, but keep in CHANNELD_AWAITING_LOCKIN
- after fixing the initial broadcast failure, the user could manually rebroadcast the tx and
keep the channel
openingd/opening_funder_finished:
- broadcast_tx callback function now handles both success and failure
jsonrpc: added error code FUNDING_BROADCAST_FAIL
manpage: added error code returned by fundchannel command
This makes the user more aware of broadcast failure, so it hopefully doesn't
try to broadcast new tx's that depend on its change_outputs. Some users have reported (see
issue #2171) a whole sequence of fundings failing, because each funding was using the change
output of the previous one, which would not confirm.
We actually produce an invalid JSON error at the moment: bitcoin-cli
complains "JSON value is not an integer as expected" rather than returning
the given error. Make our error a valid JSON RPC error.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Spurious errors were occuring around checking the provided
current commitment point from the peer on reconnect when
option_data_loss_protect is enabled. The problem was that
we were using an inaccurate measure to screen for which
commitment point to compare the peer's provided one to.
This fixes the problem with screening, plus makes our
data_loss test a teensy bit more robust.
Currently only used by gossipd for channel elimination.
Also print them in canonical form (/[01]), so tests need to be
changed.
Suggested-by: @cdecker
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
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>
Rusty Russell
Christian Decker
Simon Vrouwe
lisa neigut