I was unable to do a "Max" amount submarine swap because the
`fee_estimate` method used by `LNWallet.num_sats_can_send()` uses a
hardcoded `fee_proportional_millionths` to estimate the fee for the
lightning payment.
When the actual fee determined later is higher
than the estimated fee the payment fails as the channel is unable to add
the htlc sum including the real fees as the amount exceeds the balance of
the channel.
Using the fees the maximum fees user has configured and estimate the
potential fee as inverse of PaymentFeeBudget is more
reliable/conservative as we definitely aren't going to pay more fees
than this amount.
When moving the lightning fee slider in the SettingsDialog by clicking
on the range instead of pulling the slider the new fee value wouldn't
get stored in the config as the sliderRelased signal is only emitted
when the slider is pulled.
This change updates it on valueChanged.
Use the `OnionFailureCode.INVALID_ONION_VERSION` (BADONION | PERM | 4)
code when sending back `update_fail_malformed_htlc` as just sending a plain
`BADONION` is not explicitly mentioned as correct in the spec.
Splits `LNWallet.dont_settle_htlcs` into `LNWallet.dont_settle_htlcs`
and `LNWallet.dont_expire_htlcs`.
Registering a payment hash in dont_settle_htlcs will prevent it from
getting fulfilled if we have the preimage stored. The preimage will not
be released before the the payment hash gets removed from
dont_settle_htlcs. Htlcs can still get expired as usual or failed if no
preimage is known.
This is only used by Just-in-time channel openings.
Registering a payment hash in dont_expire_htlcs allows to overwrite the
minimum final cltv delta value after which htlcs would usually get
expired. This allows to delay expiry of htlcs or, if the value in the
dont_settle_htlcs dict is None, completely prevent expiry and let the
htlc get expired onchain.
Splitting this up in two different dicts makes it more explicit and
easier to reason about what they are actually doing.
Please enter the commit message for your changes. Lines starting
Adds test_payment_bundle_with_hold_invoice to simulate the use of a
payment bundle in which one invoice of the bundle needs to trigger a hold invoice
callback (similar to submarine swaps).
Also modifies the test helper _test_simple_payment() to compare the
results of all payment attempts instead of just returning after the
first (of multiple) payments raises its result causing the test to miss
if all payments were successful or not.
It seems useful to report exceptions happening in the htlc_switch to the
crash reporter as it shouldn't raise exceptions in theory and this could
help catch subtle bugs.
Add test `test_hold_invoice_set_doesnt_get_expired` to test_lnpeer to
ensure a mpp set on which a hold invoice callback doesn't get expired
automatically if the cltv_abs falls below MIN_FINAL_CLTV_DELTA_ACCEPTED
as these sets should only get failed if the htlcs are safe to fail by
the target of the hold invoice callback (e.g. swap got refunded
successfully).
Adds test_forwarder_fails_for_inconsistent_trampoline_onions
which checks that a forwarder compares the trampoline onions of a mpp
set and fails the set if the onions are not similar.
In the test alice sends a mpp through bob with 2 htlcs, in one
trampoline onion amt_to_forward is off by 1 msat so bob fails the htlc
set instead of initiating the trampoline forwarding.
Add sanity check that bob is not forwarding more sats to carol if than
he receives from alice. (he only forwards once and doesn't try to
forward multiple times).
This should get caught by asserts in lnworker/lnpeer, nevertheless it
seems to make sense to just add this test to prevent regressions of this
kind.
1. Alice sends two HTLCs to Bob, not reaching total_msat,
and eventually they MPP_TIMEOUT
2. Bob fails both HTLCs
3. Alice then retries and sends HTLCs again to Bob, for the same RHASH,
this time reaching total_msat, and the payment succeeds
Test that the sets are properly cleaned up after MPP_TIMEOUT
and the sender gets a second chance to pay the same invoice.
Add `test_reject_invalid_min_final_cltv_delta` which is supposed to test
that the peer rejects incoming htlcs with final cltv delta differing
from what has been requested in the lightning invoice.
refactor `htlc_switch` to new architecture to make it more robust
against partial settlement of htlc sets and increase maintainability.
Htlcs are now processed in two steps, first the htlcs are collected into
sets from the channels, and potentially failed on their own already.
Then a second loop iterates over the htlc sets and finalizes only on
whole sets.
# Conflicts:
# electrum/lnpeer.py
Add unittest to TestPeerForwarding which sends a multi trampoline
payment.
Wait another htlc_switch iteration in tests because trampolines might have different delays
There is a race when initiating multiple lightning payments concurrently
(e.g. when doing a reverse swap with prepayment + swap payment).
suggest_splits might overallocate
split amounts for a channel as the splitting of both invoice amounts runs
concurrently and before acutal htlcs that reduce the channels balance
have been added to the channel yet. This results in a "not
enough balance" PaymentFailure once we try to send the htlcs and the
other payment attempt already reduced the available balance of the
channel.
This fix takes a lock from splitting the amount until the htlcs are
put on the channel, so suggest_splits always acts on the correct channel
balance.
