This makes it clear we're dealing with a message which is a wrapped error
reply (needing unwrap_onionreply), not an already-wrapped one.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
`wallet_payment_store` would free the `wallet_payment` instance which would
then cause us to reload it from the DB. Instead of doing the store->free->load
dance we now tell `wallet_payment_store` whether it should take ownership and
leave it alone if not.
Passing the payment around instead of referencing it through payment_hash and
partid is a nice side-effect.
`wallet_payment_store` frees the unstored payment after it has stored it, but
we still need that instance for our notifications. This is the smallest
possible fix, but I plan to refactor this out.
Changelog-Changed: plugin: `notify_sendpay_success` and `notify_sendpay_failure` are now always called, even if there is no command waiting on the result.
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:
> One thing I noticed but didn't investigate much: after sending the two
> payments, I tried using `waitsendpay` and it reported an error *208*
> (*"Never attempted payment for
> '98ee736d29d860948e436546a88b0cc84f267de8818531b0fdbe6ce3d080f22a'"*).
>
> I was expecting the result to be something like: "payment succeeded for
> that payment hash" (the HTLCs were correctly settled).
Indeed, if you waitsendpay without specifying a partid, you are waiting
for 0, which may not exist. Clarify the error msg.
Reported-by: @t-bast
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>
Explicit #if EXPERIMENTAL_FEATURES check in case we enable them at different
times, but it requires a payment_secret since we put them in the same field.
This incidently stops it working on legacy nodes.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
msatoshi was used to indicate the amount the invoice asked for, but
for parallel sendpay it's required, as it allows our sanity check of
limiting the total payments in flight, ie. it becomes
'total_msat'.
There's a special case for sendonion, which always tells us the value is 0.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We currently refuse a payment if one is already in flight. For parallel
payments, it's a bit more subtle: we want to refuse if it we already have
the total-amount-of-invoice in flight.
So we get all the current payments, and sum the pending ones.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In particular, we're about to do surgery on the detection-of-previous-payments
logic, and we should not do this in two places.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is in preparation for partial payments. For existing payments,
partid is 0 (to match the corresponding payment).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is in preparation for partial payments. For existing payments,
partid is 0 (arbitrarity) and total_msat is msatoshi.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Now "raw_payload" is always the complete string (including realm or length
bytes at the front).
This has several effects:
1. We can receive an decrypt an onion which is grossly malformed.
2. We can still hand this to the htlc_accepted hook.
3. We then fail it unless the htlc_accepted accepts it manually.
4. The createonion API now takes the raw payload, and does not know
anything about "style".
The only caveat is that the sphinx code needs to know the payload
length: we have a call for that, which simply tells it to copy the
entire onion (and treat us as the final node) if it's invalid.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
If we initiated the payment using an externally generated onion we don't know
what the final hop gets, or even who it is, so we don't display the amount in
these cases. I chose to show `null` instead in order not to break dependees
that rely on the value being there.
If we can't decode the onion, because the onion got corrupted or we used
`sendonion` without specifying the `shared_secrets` used, the best we can do
is tell the caller instead.
This means that c-lightning can now internally decrypt an eventual error
message, and not force the caller to implement the decryption. The main
difficulty was that we now have a new state (channels and nodes not specified,
while shared_secrets are specified) which needed to be handled.
When using `sendonion` with `shared_secrets` we may be able to decode the
onioned error message but we cannot infer which node reported the failure
since we don't know which nodes where involved.
We are breaking with a couple of assumptions, namely that we have the
`path_secrets` to decode the error onion. If this happens we just want it to
error out.
These are useful for the `createonion` JSON-RPC we're going to build next. The
secret is used for the optional `session_key` while the hex-encoded binary is
used for the `assocdata` field to which the onion commits. The latter does not
have a constant size, hence the raw binary conversion.
Also pulls in a new onion error (mpp_timeout). We change our
route_step_decode_end() to always return the total_msat and optional
secret.
We check total_amount (to prohibit mpp), but we do nothing with
secret for now other than hand it to the htlc_accepted hook.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Default is legacy. If we have future styles, new strings can be defined,
but for now it's "tlv" or "legacy".
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
pPayment field includes the basic information of the payment, so the return valves of 'sendpay_success()' and 'sendpay_fail()' should include this field.
Note "immediate_routing_failure" is before payment creation, and for this case, return won't include payment fields.
`sendpay_success`
A notification for topic `sendpay_success` is sent every time a sendpay
success(with `complete` status). The json is same as the return value of
command `sendpay`/`waitsendpay` when these cammand succeeds.
```json
{
"sendpay_success": {
"id": 1,
"payment_hash": "5c85bf402b87d4860f4a728e2e58a2418bda92cd7aea0ce494f11670cfbfb206",
"destination": "035d2b1192dfba134e10e540875d366ebc8bc353d5aa766b80c090b39c3a5d885d",
"msatoshi": 100000000,
"amount_msat": "100000000msat",
"msatoshi_sent": 100001001,
"amount_sent_msat": "100001001msat",
"created_at": 1561390572,
"status": "complete",
"payment_preimage": "9540d98095fd7f37687ebb7759e733934234d4f934e34433d4998a37de3733ee"
}
}
```
`sendpay` doesn't wait for the result of sendpay and `waitsendpay`
returns the result of sendpay in specified time or timeout, but
`sendpay_success` will always return the result anytime when sendpay
successes if is was subscribed.
Rusty Russell
Christian Decker
fiatjaf
trueptolemy
trueptolemy