use routing::router::{PaymentParameters, Route, RouteHop, RouteParameters, find_route, get_route};
use ln::features::{ChannelFeatures, InitFeatures, InvoiceFeatures, NodeFeatures};
use ln::msgs;
-use ln::msgs::{ChannelMessageHandler, RoutingMessageHandler, ErrorAction};
+use ln::msgs::{ChannelMessageHandler, RoutingMessageHandler, OptionalField, ErrorAction};
use util::enforcing_trait_impls::EnforcingSigner;
use util::{byte_utils, test_utils};
use util::events::{Event, MessageSendEvent, MessageSendEventsProvider, PaymentPurpose, ClosureReason};
insane_open_helper("Bogus channel_reserve_satoshis", |mut msg| { msg.channel_reserve_satoshis = msg.funding_satoshis + 1; msg });
- insane_open_helper(r"push_msat \d+ was larger than funding value \d+", |mut msg| { msg.push_msat = (msg.funding_satoshis - msg.channel_reserve_satoshis) * 1000 + 1; msg });
+ insane_open_helper(r"push_msat \d+ was larger than channel amount minus reserve \(\d+\)", |mut msg| { msg.push_msat = (msg.funding_satoshis - msg.channel_reserve_satoshis) * 1000 + 1; msg });
insane_open_helper("Peer never wants payout outputs?", |mut msg| { msg.dust_limit_satoshis = msg.funding_satoshis + 1 ; msg });
assert_eq!(res.htlc_minimum_msat, 1);
}
+#[test]
+fn test_channel_update_has_correct_htlc_maximum_msat() {
+ // Tests that the `ChannelUpdate` message has the correct values for `htlc_maximum_msat` set.
+ // Bolt 7 specifies that if present `htlc_maximum_msat`:
+ // 1. MUST be set to less than or equal to the channel capacity. In LDK, this is capped to
+ // 90% of the `channel_value`.
+ // 2. MUST be set to less than or equal to the `max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat` received from the peer.
+
+ let mut config_30_percent = UserConfig::default();
+ config_30_percent.channel_options.announced_channel = true;
+ config_30_percent.own_channel_config.max_inbound_htlc_value_in_flight_percent_of_channel = 30;
+ let mut config_50_percent = UserConfig::default();
+ config_50_percent.channel_options.announced_channel = true;
+ config_50_percent.own_channel_config.max_inbound_htlc_value_in_flight_percent_of_channel = 50;
+ let mut config_95_percent = UserConfig::default();
+ config_95_percent.channel_options.announced_channel = true;
+ config_95_percent.own_channel_config.max_inbound_htlc_value_in_flight_percent_of_channel = 95;
+ let mut config_100_percent = UserConfig::default();
+ config_100_percent.channel_options.announced_channel = true;
+ config_100_percent.own_channel_config.max_inbound_htlc_value_in_flight_percent_of_channel = 100;
+
+ let chanmon_cfgs = create_chanmon_cfgs(4);
+ let node_cfgs = create_node_cfgs(4, &chanmon_cfgs);
+ let node_chanmgrs = create_node_chanmgrs(4, &node_cfgs, &[Some(config_30_percent), Some(config_50_percent), Some(config_95_percent), Some(config_100_percent)]);
+ let nodes = create_network(4, &node_cfgs, &node_chanmgrs);
+
+ let channel_value_satoshis = 100000;
+ let channel_value_msat = channel_value_satoshis * 1000;
+ let channel_value_30_percent_msat = (channel_value_msat as f64 * 0.3) as u64;
+ let channel_value_50_percent_msat = (channel_value_msat as f64 * 0.5) as u64;
+ let channel_value_90_percent_msat = (channel_value_msat as f64 * 0.9) as u64;
+
+ let (node_0_chan_update, node_1_chan_update, _, _) = create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 0, 1, channel_value_satoshis, 10001, InitFeatures::known(), InitFeatures::known());
+ let (node_2_chan_update, node_3_chan_update, _, _) = create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 2, 3, channel_value_satoshis, 10001, InitFeatures::known(), InitFeatures::known());
+
+ // Assert that `node[0]`'s `ChannelUpdate` is capped at 50 percent of the `channel_value`, as
+ // that's the value of `node[1]`'s `holder_max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat`.
+ assert_eq!(node_0_chan_update.contents.htlc_maximum_msat, OptionalField::Present(channel_value_50_percent_msat));
+ // Assert that `node[1]`'s `ChannelUpdate` is capped at 30 percent of the `channel_value`, as
+ // that's the value of `node[0]`'s `holder_max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat`.
+ assert_eq!(node_1_chan_update.contents.htlc_maximum_msat, OptionalField::Present(channel_value_30_percent_msat));
+
+ // Assert that `node[2]`'s `ChannelUpdate` is capped at 90 percent of the `channel_value`, as
+ // the value of `node[3]`'s `holder_max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat` (100%), exceeds 90% of the
+ // `channel_value`.
+ assert_eq!(node_2_chan_update.contents.htlc_maximum_msat, OptionalField::Present(channel_value_90_percent_msat));
+ // Assert that `node[3]`'s `ChannelUpdate` is capped at 90 percent of the `channel_value`, as
+ // the value of `node[2]`'s `holder_max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat` (95%), exceeds 90% of the
+ // `channel_value`.
+ assert_eq!(node_3_chan_update.contents.htlc_maximum_msat, OptionalField::Present(channel_value_90_percent_msat));
+}
+
#[test]
fn test_manually_accept_inbound_channel_request() {
let mut manually_accept_conf = UserConfig::default();
claim_payment(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1], &nodes[2]], payment_preimage_2);
}
-#[test]
-fn test_dup_htlc_second_fail_panic() {
- // Previously, if we received two HTLCs back-to-back, where the second overran the expected
- // value for the payment, we'd fail back both HTLCs after generating a `PaymentReceived` event.
- // Then, if the user failed the second payment, they'd hit a "tried to fail an already failed
- // HTLC" debug panic. This tests for this behavior, checking that only one HTLC is auto-failed.
+fn do_test_dup_htlc_second_rejected(test_for_second_fail_panic: bool) {
let chanmon_cfgs = create_chanmon_cfgs(2);
let node_cfgs = create_node_cfgs(2, &chanmon_cfgs);
let node_chanmgrs = create_node_chanmgrs(2, &node_cfgs, &[None, None]);
let payment_params = PaymentParameters::from_node_id(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id())
.with_features(InvoiceFeatures::known());
- let scorer = test_utils::TestScorer::with_penalty(0);
- let random_seed_bytes = chanmon_cfgs[1].keys_manager.get_secure_random_bytes();
- let route = get_route(
- &nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), &payment_params, &nodes[0].network_graph.read_only(),
- Some(&nodes[0].node.list_usable_channels().iter().collect::<Vec<_>>()),
- 10_000, TEST_FINAL_CLTV, nodes[0].logger, &scorer, &random_seed_bytes).unwrap();
+ let route = get_route!(nodes[0], payment_params, 10_000, TEST_FINAL_CLTV).unwrap();
- let (_, our_payment_hash, our_payment_secret) = get_payment_preimage_hash!(&nodes[1]);
+ let (our_payment_preimage, our_payment_hash, our_payment_secret) = get_payment_preimage_hash!(&nodes[1]);
{
nodes[0].node.send_payment(&route, our_payment_hash, &Some(our_payment_secret)).unwrap();
// the first HTLC delivered above.
}
- // Now we go fail back the first HTLC from the user end.
expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable_ignore!(nodes[1]);
nodes[1].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards();
- nodes[1].node.fail_htlc_backwards(&our_payment_hash);
- expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable_ignore!(nodes[1]);
- nodes[1].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards();
+ if test_for_second_fail_panic {
+ // Now we go fail back the first HTLC from the user end.
+ nodes[1].node.fail_htlc_backwards(&our_payment_hash);
- check_added_monitors!(nodes[1], 1);
- let fail_updates_1 = get_htlc_update_msgs!(nodes[1], nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id());
- assert_eq!(fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs.len(), 2);
+ expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable_ignore!(nodes[1]);
+ nodes[1].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards();
+
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[1], 1);
+ let fail_updates_1 = get_htlc_update_msgs!(nodes[1], nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id());
+ assert_eq!(fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs.len(), 2);
+
+ nodes[0].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs[0]);
+ nodes[0].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs[1]);
+ commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[0], nodes[1], fail_updates_1.commitment_signed, false);
+
+ let failure_events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_events();
+ assert_eq!(failure_events.len(), 2);
+ if let Event::PaymentPathFailed { .. } = failure_events[0] {} else { panic!(); }
+ if let Event::PaymentPathFailed { .. } = failure_events[1] {} else { panic!(); }
+ } else {
+ // Let the second HTLC fail and claim the first
+ expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable_ignore!(nodes[1]);
+ nodes[1].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards();
+
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[1], 1);
+ let fail_updates_1 = get_htlc_update_msgs!(nodes[1], nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id());
+ nodes[0].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs[0]);
+ commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[0], nodes[1], fail_updates_1.commitment_signed, false);
+
+ expect_payment_failed_conditions!(nodes[0], our_payment_hash, true, PaymentFailedConditions::new().mpp_parts_remain());
+
+ claim_payment(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1]], our_payment_preimage);
+ }
+}
+
+#[test]
+fn test_dup_htlc_second_fail_panic() {
+ // Previously, if we received two HTLCs back-to-back, where the second overran the expected
+ // value for the payment, we'd fail back both HTLCs after generating a `PaymentReceived` event.
+ // Then, if the user failed the second payment, they'd hit a "tried to fail an already failed
+ // HTLC" debug panic. This tests for this behavior, checking that only one HTLC is auto-failed.
+ do_test_dup_htlc_second_rejected(true);
+}
+
+#[test]
+fn test_dup_htlc_second_rejected() {
+ // Test that if we receive a second HTLC for an MPP payment that overruns the payment amount we
+ // simply reject the second HTLC but are still able to claim the first HTLC.
+ do_test_dup_htlc_second_rejected(false);
+}
+
+#[test]
+fn test_inconsistent_mpp_params() {
+ // Test that if we recieve two HTLCs with different payment parameters we fail back the first
+ // such HTLC and allow the second to stay.
+ let chanmon_cfgs = create_chanmon_cfgs(4);
+ let node_cfgs = create_node_cfgs(4, &chanmon_cfgs);
+ let node_chanmgrs = create_node_chanmgrs(4, &node_cfgs, &[None, None, None, None]);
+ let nodes = create_network(4, &node_cfgs, &node_chanmgrs);
+
+ create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 0, 1, 100_000, 0, InitFeatures::known(), InitFeatures::known());
+ create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 0, 2, 100_000, 0, InitFeatures::known(), InitFeatures::known());
+ create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 1, 3, 100_000, 0, InitFeatures::known(), InitFeatures::known());
+ create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 2, 3, 100_000, 0, InitFeatures::known(), InitFeatures::known());
+
+ let payment_params = PaymentParameters::from_node_id(nodes[3].node.get_our_node_id())
+ .with_features(InvoiceFeatures::known());
+ let mut route = get_route!(nodes[0], payment_params, 15_000_000, TEST_FINAL_CLTV).unwrap();
+ assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 2);
+ route.paths.sort_by(|path_a, _| {
+ // Sort the path so that the path through nodes[1] comes first
+ if path_a[0].pubkey == nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id() {
+ core::cmp::Ordering::Less } else { core::cmp::Ordering::Greater }
+ });
+ let payment_params_opt = Some(payment_params);
+
+ let (our_payment_preimage, our_payment_hash, our_payment_secret) = get_payment_preimage_hash!(&nodes[3]);
+
+ let cur_height = nodes[0].best_block_info().1;
+ let payment_id = PaymentId([42; 32]);
+ {
+ nodes[0].node.send_payment_along_path(&route.paths[0], &payment_params_opt, &our_payment_hash, &Some(our_payment_secret), 15_000_000, cur_height, payment_id, &None).unwrap();
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[0], 1);
+
+ let mut events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
+ assert_eq!(events.len(), 1);
+ pass_along_path(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1], &nodes[3]], 15_000_000, our_payment_hash, Some(our_payment_secret), events.pop().unwrap(), false, None);
+ }
+ assert!(nodes[3].node.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());
+
+ {
+ nodes[0].node.send_payment_along_path(&route.paths[1], &payment_params_opt, &our_payment_hash, &Some(our_payment_secret), 14_000_000, cur_height, payment_id, &None).unwrap();
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[0], 1);
+
+ let mut events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
+ assert_eq!(events.len(), 1);
+ let payment_event = SendEvent::from_event(events.pop().unwrap());
+
+ nodes[2].node.handle_update_add_htlc(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), &payment_event.msgs[0]);
+ commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[2], nodes[0], payment_event.commitment_msg, false);
+
+ expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable!(nodes[2]);
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[2], 1);
- nodes[0].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs[0]);
- nodes[0].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs[1]);
- commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[0], nodes[1], fail_updates_1.commitment_signed, false);
+ let mut events = nodes[2].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
+ assert_eq!(events.len(), 1);
+ let payment_event = SendEvent::from_event(events.pop().unwrap());
+
+ nodes[3].node.handle_update_add_htlc(&nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id(), &payment_event.msgs[0]);
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[3], 0);
+ commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[3], nodes[2], payment_event.commitment_msg, true, true);
+
+ // At this point, nodes[3] should notice the two HTLCs don't contain the same total payment
+ // amount. It will assume the second is a privacy attack (no longer particularly relevant
+ // post-payment_secrets) and fail back the new HTLC.
+ }
+ expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable_ignore!(nodes[3]);
+ nodes[3].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards();
+ expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable_ignore!(nodes[3]);
+ nodes[3].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards();
+
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[3], 1);
+
+ let fail_updates_1 = get_htlc_update_msgs!(nodes[3], nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id());
+ nodes[2].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[3].node.get_our_node_id(), &fail_updates_1.update_fail_htlcs[0]);
+ commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[2], nodes[3], fail_updates_1.commitment_signed, false);
+
+ expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable!(nodes[2]);
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[2], 1);
+
+ let fail_updates_2 = get_htlc_update_msgs!(nodes[2], nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id());
+ nodes[0].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id(), &fail_updates_2.update_fail_htlcs[0]);
+ commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[0], nodes[2], fail_updates_2.commitment_signed, false);
+
+ expect_payment_failed_conditions!(nodes[0], our_payment_hash, true, PaymentFailedConditions::new().mpp_parts_remain());
+
+ nodes[0].node.send_payment_along_path(&route.paths[1], &payment_params_opt, &our_payment_hash, &Some(our_payment_secret), 15_000_000, cur_height, payment_id, &None).unwrap();
+ check_added_monitors!(nodes[0], 1);
+
+ let mut events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
+ assert_eq!(events.len(), 1);
+ pass_along_path(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[2], &nodes[3]], 15_000_000, our_payment_hash, Some(our_payment_secret), events.pop().unwrap(), true, None);
- let failure_events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_events();
- assert_eq!(failure_events.len(), 2);
- if let Event::PaymentPathFailed { .. } = failure_events[0] {} else { panic!(); }
- if let Event::PaymentPathFailed { .. } = failure_events[1] {} else { panic!(); }
+ claim_payment_along_route(&nodes[0], &[&[&nodes[1], &nodes[3]], &[&nodes[2], &nodes[3]]], false, our_payment_preimage);
}
#[test]
projects / rust-lightning / blobdiff