As per cd3c99e722
we should send the next_funding_txid if we've sent our commitment sigs,
but we haven't received the peer's tx_signatures.
Note that we send here, but don't verify that it's arrived.
In most cases, it's the same as option_anchor_outputs, but for
fees it's different. This transformation is the simplest:
pass it as a pair, and test it explicitly.
In future we could rationalize some paths, but this was nice
and mechanical.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We need to know both, because in theory we could negotiate a
non-anchor channel even if they support it.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We need to know both, because in theory we could negotiate a
non-anchor channel even if they support it.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
option_scid_alias inside a channel_type allows for more private
channels: in particular, it tells the peer that it MUST NOT allow
routing via the real short channel id, and MUST use the alias.
It only makes sense (and is only permitted!) on unannounced channels.
Unfortunately, we didn't set this bit in the channel_type in v12.0
when it was introduced, instead relying on the presence of the feature
bit with the peer. This was fixed in 23.05, but:
1. Prior to 23.05 we didn't allow it to be set at all, and
2. LND has a limited set of features they allow, and this isn't allowed without
option_anchors_zero_fee_htlc_tx.
We could simply drop this channel_type until we merge anchors, *but*
that has nasty privacy implications (you can probe the real channel id).
So, if we don't negotiate anchors (we don't!), we don't set this
channel_type bit even if we want it, and *intuit* it, based on:
1. Is this a non-anchor channel_type?
2. Did we both send channel_type?
3. Is this an unannounced channel?
4. Did both peers announce support for scid aliases?
In addition, while looking at the previous backwards-compat code, I
realized that v23.05 violated the spec and send accept_channel with
OPT_SCID_ALIAS if it intuited it, even if it wasn't offered. Stop
doing this, but allow our peers to.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Changelog-Fixed: Fix incompatibility with LND which prevented us opening private channels
Fixes: #6208
And no longer insist on opt_quiesce.
Changelog-EXPERIMENTAL: Config: `--experimental-upgrade-protocol` enables simple channel upgrades.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Changelog-Fixed: Protocol: we will upfront reject channel_open which asks for a zeroconf channel unless we are going to do a zerconf channel.
I tested this indeed breaks if we don't accept it, then implemented
the code to accept it.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Changelog-Fixed: protocol: We now correctly accept the `option_scid_alias` bit in `open_channel` `channel_type`.
Changelog-Deprecated: protocol: Not setting `option_scid_alias` in `option_channel` `channel_type` for unannounced channels.
Libwally update breaks compatibility, so
we do this in one large step.
Changelog-Changed: JSON-RPC: elements network PSET now only supports PSETv2.
Changelog-Added: JSON-RPC: PSBTv2 supported for fundchannel_complete, openchannel_update, reserveinputs, sendpsbt, signpsbt, withdraw and unreserveinputs parameter psbt, openchannel_init and openchannel_bump parameter initialpsbt, openchannel_signed parameter signed_psbt and utxopsbt parameter utxopsbt
- Renamed zerod_channel_ids to temporary_channel_id
- Renamed witness_stack->witnesses
- Renamed witness_element->witness_elements
- open_channel2 now includes second commitment point
- accept_channel2 now includes second commitment point
Current commit on rfc branch 64f7f360b9f3c2664d078e2129cfe83098fc4617
Changelog-EXPERIMENTAL: Protocol: dual-funding spec changed in incompatible ways, won't work with old versions (but maybe soon with Eclair!!)
It's not likely but possible that the node's settings will shift btw a
start and an RBF; we persist the setting to the database so we don't
lose it.
Right now holding onto it forever is kind of extra but maybe we'll
reuse the setting for splices? idk.
Should this be a channel type??
`openchannel_init` takes a psbt, which we pipe over to dualopend
process.
If the peer requests that they'll only accept confirmed inputs, we need
to go validate those before we continue.
This wires up the harness for this (validation check yet tc)
Wait until we get a tx-abort back to terminate the process.
Nota Bene: this can cause RPC calls to hang if the peer never
responds back with tx-abort.
Note that we also have to re-route how open-abort + negotiation_failed
handle failures, as open_abort no longer closes the process
automagically.
When a channel open fails, we use tx-abort instead of warning/error.
This means that the peer won't disconnect! And instead when a new
message arrives, we'll need to rebuild the dualopend subd (if missing).
Makes opens a bit easer to retry (no reconnect needed), as well as keeps
the connection alive for other channels we may have with that peer.
Changelog-Changed: Experimental-Dual-Fund: open failures don't disconnect, but instead fail the opening process
Prior to this we might end up with a commitment transaction without
any outputs, if combined with `--dev-allowdustreserve`. Otherwise the
reserve being larger than dust means the funder could not drop its
direct output to be below dust.
Reported-by: Rusty Russell <@rustyrussell>
Technically this is a non-conformance with the spec, hence the `dev`
flag to opt-in, however I'm being told that it is also implemented in
other implementations. I'll follow this up with a proposal to the spec
to remove the checks we now bypass.
This check, while in line with the specification, would cause issues
in mixed setups when the funder or fundee allows dust reserves, but
the counterparty does not. It is not an issue for the non-dust reserve
node since in this case it's the peer giving us more flexibility not
the other way around.
Technically this is a non-conformance with the spec, hence the `dev`
flag to opt-in, however I'm being told that it is also implemented in
other implementations. I'll follow this up with a proposal to the spec
to remove the checks we now bypass.
This is incompatible with the spec as it removes the enforcement for
reserves being above dust, but from what I can see from other
implementations it seems that others have allowed this as well.
This commit just guards the necessary changes with compilation guards, so
we can decide either way quickly. This part of the PR is not intended
to be final, just as a discussion basis.
Add memleak_ignore_children() so callers can do exclusions themselves.
Having two exclusions was always such a hack!
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
1) dualopen has fd to connectd
2) channeld needs to take over
3) dualopen passes fd that leads to a connectd over for channeld to use
4) lightningd must receive the fd transfer request and process
5) dualopen shuts down and closes everything it owns
4 & 5 end up in a race. If 5 happens before 4, channeld ends up with an invalid fd for connectd — leaving it in a position to not receive messages.
Lingering for a second makes 4 win the race. Since the daemon is closing anyway, waiting for a second should be alright.
Changelog-Fixed: Fixed a condition for newly created channels that could trigger a need for reconnect.
niftynei
Greg Sanders
Rusty Russell
adi2011
Michael Schmoock
Christian Decker
Dustin Dettmer