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.

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

askrene: add layer auto.ignorelocalhtlclimits #8126

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Lagrang3
Copy link
Collaborator

@Lagrang3 Lagrang3 commented Feb 27, 2025

The new layer "auto.ignorelocalhtlclimits" helps remove the HTLC_min/max limits on local channels.

In renepay we already ignore those limits, see PR #7159.

@Lagrang3 Lagrang3 requested a review from cdecker as a code owner February 27, 2025 12:46
@Lagrang3 Lagrang3 force-pushed the askrene-localchans-htlcmax branch 2 times, most recently from 8c6128f to 4397a90 Compare February 27, 2025 20:45
The new layer "auto.ignorelocalhtlclimits" helps remove the HTLC_min/max
limits on local channels.

Changelog-Added: askrene: add layer auto.ignorelocalhtlclimits

Signed-off-by: Lagrang3 <[email protected]>
@Lagrang3 Lagrang3 force-pushed the askrene-localchans-htlcmax branch from 4397a90 to 512e491 Compare February 27, 2025 20:47
@rustyrussell
Copy link
Contributor

First, let me start by saying this implementation is perfect 🧡 Documentation, tests, clean implementation...

However, there are real constraints on local capacities. injectpaymentonion just uses the same logic as forwarding (which has the advantage of consistency, so we're not leaking information about the source of payment). We could loosen that if we want to, but the remote side also gives us a max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat (which is a total for all htlcs, but logically an upper bound on any single one) and a htlc_minimum_msat which we are not allowed to go beneath.

So if we were to do this, we should use those constraints, which is a bit trickier....

@Lagrang3
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Lagrang3 commented Mar 3, 2025

Good point!
As a matter of fact we have just added in v25.02 this new parameter their_max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat,
let's see how we can use it to constraint the sum of all pending HTLCs.

On the leak side... I am not sure, we would be revealing our immediate peer that we are the source of the payment,
he already knows how we own on that channel.
But yes, we probably shouldn't let him also know that we are the source of the payment.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants