Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Implement PendingHTLCsRelayable Event to split acceptance/relay checks #680

Open
ariard opened this issue Aug 28, 2020 · 8 comments
Open

Implement PendingHTLCsRelayable Event to split acceptance/relay checks #680

ariard opened this issue Aug 28, 2020 · 8 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Milestone
0.2

Comments

@ariard
Copy link

ariard commented Aug 28, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Currently, we apply both BOLT-2 incoming channels settings checks and BOLT-4 relay checks at update_add_htlc reception. We should split relay checks and get incoming HTLC acceptance generate a Event::PendingHTLCsRelayable. This event could be consumed by process_pending_htlc_relayable and should generate a PendingHTLCsForwardable. In between any kind of client custom function can be implemented support for stricter relay policy, on-the-flight generated outgoing zero-conf channel, delayed relay, trampoline-style of routing, ...

See further #670 and http://gnusha.org/rust-bitcoin/.
@ariard ariard added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 28, 2020
@TheBlueMatt
Copy link
Collaborator

This could also allow live-rebalancing on the client's end, which would be cool.

@ariard
Copy link
Author

ariard commented Sep 8, 2020

Also fix current bug : #633 (comment)

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt mentioned this issue Sep 14, 2020
Merged
@TheBlueMatt
Copy link
Collaborator

Note that the bug at #633 (comment) has been fixed in #690.

@ariard
Copy link
Author

ariard commented Jul 5, 2021

Might serve to address few timing attacks : #975 (comment)

@ariard
Copy link
Author

ariard commented Jul 5, 2021

Might serve as iptables for routing nodes : #975 (comment)

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt mentioned this issue Jul 14, 2021
Closed
@ariard
Copy link
Author

ariard commented Oct 19, 2021

Maybe also addressing that at the same time : #1119 (comment)

@TheBlueMatt
Copy link
Collaborator

May need to rely on #1302

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt added this to the 0.0.111 milestone Jun 25, 2022
@johncantrell97 johncantrell97 mentioned this issue Jul 11, 2022
Closed
@TheBlueMatt
Copy link
Collaborator

Turns out we're not gonna rely on this for #1302, so there's no reason for this to have a very-soon milestone.

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt modified the milestones: 0.0.111, 0.1.1 Aug 22, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
LDK Roadmap
Status: No status
Milestone
0.2
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@TheBlueMatt @ariard