Add support for liquidity mgmt. via `lightning-liquidity` by tnull · Pull Request #223 · lightningdevkit/ldk-node

tnull · 2023-12-20T14:18:12Z

Closes#194

We add initial, alpha-stage support for liquidity-management via LSPS2/lightning-liquidity.

Draft as still work in progress (and blocked on lightningdevkit/lightning-liquidity#73 / lightningdevkit/lightning-liquidity#74).

jkczyz · 2024-02-06T04:21:02Z

+ if let Some(lsps2_service) = self.lsps2_service.as_ref() {
+ if counterparty_node_id != lsps2_service.node_id {
+ debug_assert!(
+ false,
+ "Received response from unexpected LSP counterparty. This should never happen."
+ );
+ log_error!(
+ self.logger,
+ "Received response from unexpected LSP counterparty. This should never happen."
+ );
+ return;
+ }


Gotcha. Shuffling things around and doing a pre-match might help eliminated some duplication (haven't actually tried this):
match event {Event::LSPS2Client(client_event) => matchself.lsps2_service.as_ref(){Some(lsps2_service) => {match&client_event {LSPS2ClientEvent::OpeningParametersReady{ counterparty_node_id, .. } | LSPS2ClientEvent::InvoiceParametersReady{ counterparty_node_id, .. } => {/* */},};match client_event {LSPS2ClientEvent::OpeningParametersReady{/* */ .. } => {/* */},LSPS2ClientEvent::InvoiceParametersReady{/* */ .. } => {/* */},};},None => {/* */},}};

jkczyz

Code looks good. What's the testing strategy?

jkczyz · 2024-02-06T15:17:43Z

+ if let Some(lsps2_service) = self.lsps2_service.as_ref() {
+ if counterparty_node_id != lsps2_service.node_id {
+ debug_assert!(
+ false,
+ "Received response from unexpected LSP counterparty. This should never happen."
+ );
+ log_error!(
+ self.logger,
+ "Received response from unexpected LSP counterparty. This should never happen."
+ );
+ return;
+ }


Even if you prefer repeating the counterparty_id check, it seems better to check lsps2_servicebefore matching any LSPS2ClientEvent. But will defer to your preference. I could see indentation getting out of hand.

tnull · 2024-02-06T18:38:24Z

Code looks good. What's the testing strategy?

For now we can only test manually against Testnet/Regtest/Signet nodes (actually, running on Mutinynet). We will also looking to add more testing utils to the lightning-liquidity crate (I'm thinking something similar to the Node code in LDK's lightning-background-processor tests) that would allow us to write more end-to-end tests there. Here in LDK Node I'm a bit on the fence whether to add some really simple, cfg-gated server-side logic that would allow us to also do end-to-end testing in our Rust integration tests. Might be worth it, but could also be rather invasive.

tnull · 2024-02-12T09:45:57Z

@jkczyz Let me know when I can squash the fixups.

jkczyz · 2024-02-12T22:20:46Z

@jkczyz Let me know when I can squash the fixups.

Sure, feel free to squash.

tnull · 2024-02-13T09:28:10Z

Sure, feel free to squash.

Squashed fixups without further changes.

tnull · 2024-02-15T14:50:37Z

Rebased on main to fix CI and also updated to use the just-released 0.1.0-alpha version of lightning-liquidity.

Notably, the {min,max}_payment_size_msat fields are now moved to OpeningFeeParams, which we account for in some fixups.

jkczyz

LGTM. Please squash.

tnull · 2024-02-16T10:17:34Z

LGTM. Please squash.

Squashed without further changes.

... which is nice for consistency reasons. We also fix a minor bug that would have lead us to forget a peer whenever we'd close a channel, even if it wasn't the last one.

... which is nice for consistency reasons.

We add a `LiquiditySource` object that is configurable via builder methods, currently allowing to source inbound liquidity from an LSPS2 service. In the next commit(s) we'll add corresponding API and event handling.

tnull · 2024-02-19T09:25:40Z

Rebased on main to resolve minor conflict.

yanganto · 2024-02-20T08:13:32Z

Hi @tnull
Will this PR be the final version for an LSPS client that will be used in the hackathon in March?
Will it be merged before the event?

tnull · 2024-02-20T08:15:35Z

Hi @tnull Will this PR be the final version for an LSPS client that will be used in the hackathon in March?

Yes, very likely.

Will it be merged before the event?

I assume it will be merged any day now, once @jkczyz came around to do a final pass.

tnull marked this pull request as draft December 20, 2023 14:18

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch 15 times, most recently from e8cfd19 to e12d8d4Compare January 9, 2024 16:06

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch 6 times, most recently from 43d5f5f to a626584Compare January 11, 2024 15:39

jkczyz reviewed Jan 16, 2024
View reviewed changes

Comment threadsrc/lib.rs
Comment threadsrc/lib.rs
Comment threadsrc/lib.rs
Comment threadsrc/lib.rs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/lib.rs

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch 6 times, most recently from 6644bd0 to ba1fd79Compare January 23, 2024 15:25

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from ba1fd79 to 8db5970Compare January 24, 2024 14:35

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from 5d597be to 753be94Compare February 5, 2024 10:36

jkczyz reviewed Feb 6, 2024
View reviewed changes

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from 753be94 to 6beb61cCompare February 6, 2024 10:01

jkczyz reviewed Feb 6, 2024
View reviewed changes

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from 6beb61c to e37398eCompare February 13, 2024 09:27

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from e37398e to ffdf5c0Compare February 15, 2024 14:49

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from ffdf5c0 to 3248f0dCompare February 15, 2024 15:04

jkczyz reviewed Feb 15, 2024
View reviewed changes

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from 3248f0d to f011f10Compare February 16, 2024 10:17

tnull added 8 commits February 19, 2024 10:24

Minor error message fixes
2e4936f

Have connect_open_channel return a UserChannelId
dabbb4d

Have close_channel take a UserChannelId
4d3b600
... which is nice for consistency reasons. We also fix a minor bug that would have lead us to forget a peer whenever we'd close a channel, even if it wasn't the last one.

Have update_channel_config take a UserChannelId
86d1a1f
... which is nice for consistency reasons.

Implement LiquiditySource CMH
61b2f37
We add a `LiquiditySource` object that is configurable via builder methods, currently allowing to source inbound liquidity from an LSPS2 service. In the next commit(s) we'll add corresponding API and event handling.

Implement LiquidityManager event handling
338b9c5

Implement LSPS2 invoice creation flow
49f497f

Allow for variable amount payments
3c05b17

tnull force-pushed the 2023-12-liquidity-mgmt-integration branch from f011f10 to 3c05b17Compare February 19, 2024 09:25

tnull added this to the 0.3 milestone Feb 20, 2024

jkczyz approved these changes Feb 21, 2024
View reviewed changes

tnull merged commit 980b14c into lightningdevkit:mainFeb 21, 2024

Uh oh!

Conversation

tnull commented Dec 20, 2023• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jkczyzFeb 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jkczyz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jkczyzFeb 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 6, 2024

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 12, 2024

Uh oh!

jkczyz commented Feb 12, 2024

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 13, 2024

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 15, 2024

Uh oh!

jkczyz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 16, 2024

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 19, 2024

Uh oh!

yanganto commented Feb 20, 2024

Uh oh!

tnull commented Feb 20, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

tnull commented Dec 20, 2023•
edited
Loading