Plugins don't do it right anyway, and we're about to remove it from
lightningd. Produces same format as json_pp.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
They don't clean up after themselves, so best we do it here (by this
point we've already done the pid check to make sure we're the only
lightningd here anyway).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In particular, the assert when `--addr=/sockname` is used, and that it
doesn't clean up on restart, requiring manual deletion of the socket.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
gossipd in l1 might not have registered l2 reconnecting, thus considering
the channel local-disabled.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
lightning_connectd(19780): STATUS_FAIL_INTERNAL_ERROR: Failed to bind on 2 socket: Address family not supported by protocol
"Untested code is buggy code"
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
1. We need to read in as a byte string, then decode into utf8 once we
have a marker. Otherwise we seem to mangle it horribly, and we
might have a bad utf8 string anyway.
2. We need to suppress the JSON \u escapes on output.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We should be able to pass UTF-8 strings to and from plugins without
python turning them into JSON-\u escapes.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rather than using LightningJSONDecoder's implicit "field name and
value ends in msat, try converting to Millisatoshi", we do it to
parameters using type annotations.
If you had a parameter which was an array or dict itself, we don't
delve into that, but that's probably OK.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We don't, but we should, like we do for normal RPC. However, I chose
to use function annotations, rather than names-ending-in-'msat'
because it's more Pythony.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
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>
This is the same deprecation, but one level up. For the moment, we
still support invoices with a `h` field (where description will be
necessary) but that will be removed once this option is removed.
Note that I just changed pylightning without backwards compatibility,
since the field was unlikely to be used, but we could do something
more complex here?
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In particular this matches the case of `their_unilateral/to_us` outputs, which
were missing their addresses so far.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
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>
This is particularly interesting because we handle overflow during route
calculation now; this could happen in theory once we wumbo.
It fixes a thinko when we print out routehints, too: we want to print
them out literally, not print out the effect they have on fees (which
is in the route, which we also print).
This ABI change doesn't need a CHANGELOG, since paystatus is new since
release.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Little point having users handle the postfixes manually, this
translates them, and also allows Millisatoshi to be used wherever an
'int' would be previously.
There are also helpers to create the formatting in a way c-lightning's
JSONRPC will accept.
All standard arithmetic operations with integers work.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We had occasional failures, because the fuzz could overwhelm the difference
in routes. Increasing the amount to 2,000,000 millisatoshis makes the
riskfactor 53msat (2000000 * 14 * 10 / 5259600) which is always greater
than the worst-case fuzz of 5% on the fee of 1002msat.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I got a spurious failure because the final node gave a CLTV error and
so it decided to use a different channel. It should probably handle
this corner case better, but meanwhile make the test robust.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
It was waiting for a remote channel, but not for all the interesting
channels we want to check. It can sometimes happen that further away
channels are added before closer ones are added, depending on
propagation path, flush timers and bitcoind poll timers. This now just
checks for all channels, which also reduces the ambiguity of whether
we selected a path solely because we were lacking alternatives.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
Travis timed out.
Waiting for three fundchannel commands depends on the bitcoind polling
interval (30 seconds), and then waiting for gossip propagation
requires two propagation intervals (120 seconds).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Up until now, riskfactor was useless due to implementation bugs, and
also the default setting is wrong (too low to have an effect on
reasonable payment scenarios).
Let's simplify the definition (by assuming that P(failure) of a node
is 1), to make it a simple percentage. I examined the current network
fees to see what would work, and under this definition, a default of
10 seems reasonable (equivalent to 1000 under the old definition).
It is *this* change which finally fixes our test case! The riskfactor
is now 40msat (1500000 * 14 * 10 / 5259600 = 39.9), comparable with
worst-case fuzz is 50msat (1001 * 0.05 = 50).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The test sometimes passes: our routing logic always chooses between
the shorter of two equal-cost routes (because we compare best with <
not <=).
By adding another hop, we add more noise, and by making the alternate
route fee 0 we provide the worst case.
But to be fair, we make the amount of the payment ~50c (15,000,000
msat), and increase our cltv-delay to 14 and fee-base 1000 to match
mainnet. The final patch shows the effect of this choice.
Otherwise our risk penalty is completely in the noise on
mainnet which has the vast majority of fees set at 1000msat + 1ppm.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is the direct cause of the failure of the original
test_pay_direct test and it makes sense: invoice routehints may not be
necessary, so try without them *first* rather than last.
We didn't mention the use of routehints in CHANGELOG at all yet, so
do that now.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell
Michael Schmoock
Christian Decker
ZmnSCPxj