Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Prefactor for inbound Trampoline parsing/decryption#3595
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ use crate::ln::channel_state::ChannelDetails; | ||
| use crate::types::features::{Bolt12InvoiceFeatures, ChannelFeatures, ChannelTypeFeatures, InitFeatures, NodeFeatures}; | ||
| #[cfg(any(feature = "_test_utils", test))] | ||
| use crate::types::features::Bolt11InvoiceFeatures; | ||
| #[cfg(trampoline)] | ||
| use crate::routing::gossip::NodeId; | ||
| use crate::routing::router::{BlindedTail, FixedRouter, InFlightHtlcs, Path, Payee, PaymentParameters, Route, RouteParameters, Router}; | ||
| use crate::ln::onion_payment::{check_incoming_htlc_cltv, create_recv_pending_htlc_info, create_fwd_pending_htlc_info, decode_incoming_update_add_htlc_onion, InboundHTLCErr, NextPacketDetails}; | ||
| use crate::ln::msgs; | ||
| @@ -169,6 +171,24 @@ pub enum PendingHTLCRouting { | ||
| /// The absolute CLTV of the inbound HTLC | ||
| incoming_cltv_expiry: Option<u32>, | ||
| }, | ||
| /// An HTLC which should be forwarded on to another Trampoline node. | ||
| #[cfg(trampoline)] | ||
| TrampolineForward { | ||
| /// The onion shared secret we build with the sender (or the preceding Trampoline node) used | ||
| /// to decrypt the onion. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// This is later used to encrypt failure packets in the event that the HTLC is failed. | ||
| incoming_shared_secret: [u8; 32], | ||
| /// The onion which should be included in the forwarded HTLC, telling the next hop what to | ||
| /// do with the HTLC. | ||
| onion_packet: msgs::TrampolineOnionPacket, | ||
| /// The node ID of the Trampoline node which we need to route this HTLC to. | ||
| node_id: NodeId, | ||
| /// Set if this HTLC is being forwarded within a blinded path. | ||
| blinded: Option<BlindedForward>, | ||
Collaborator There was a problem hiding this comment. Hmm? We can have a trampoline in a blinded path? I didn't think we could. | ||
| /// The absolute CLTV of the inbound HTLC | ||
| incoming_cltv_expiry: u32, | ||
| }, | ||
| /// The onion indicates that this is a payment for an invoice (supposedly) generated by us. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// Note that at this point, we have not checked that the invoice being paid was actually | ||
| @@ -270,6 +290,8 @@ impl PendingHTLCRouting { | ||
| fn blinded_failure(&self) -> Option<BlindedFailure> { | ||
| match self { | ||
| Self::Forward { blinded: Some(BlindedForward { failure, .. }), .. } => Some(*failure), | ||
| #[cfg(trampoline)] | ||
| Self::TrampolineForward { blinded: Some(BlindedForward { failure, .. }), .. } => Some(*failure), | ||
| Self::Receive { requires_blinded_error: true, .. } => Some(BlindedFailure::FromBlindedNode), | ||
| Self::ReceiveKeysend { requires_blinded_error: true, .. } => Some(BlindedFailure::FromBlindedNode), | ||
| _ => None, | ||
| @@ -279,6 +301,8 @@ impl PendingHTLCRouting { | ||
| fn incoming_cltv_expiry(&self) -> Option<u32> { | ||
valentinewallace marked this conversation as resolved.
Uh oh!There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. | ||
| match self { | ||
| Self::Forward { incoming_cltv_expiry, .. } => *incoming_cltv_expiry, | ||
| #[cfg(trampoline)] | ||
| Self::TrampolineForward { incoming_cltv_expiry, .. } => Some(*incoming_cltv_expiry), | ||
| Self::Receive { incoming_cltv_expiry, .. } => Some(*incoming_cltv_expiry), | ||
| Self::ReceiveKeysend { incoming_cltv_expiry, .. } => Some(*incoming_cltv_expiry), | ||
| } | ||
| @@ -8909,6 +8933,8 @@ This indicates a bug inside LDK. Please report this error at https://github.com/ | ||
| for (forward_info, prev_htlc_id) in pending_forwards.drain(..) { | ||
| let scid = match forward_info.routing { | ||
| PendingHTLCRouting::Forward { short_channel_id, .. } => short_channel_id, | ||
| #[cfg(trampoline)] | ||
| PendingHTLCRouting::TrampolineForward { .. } => 0, | ||
| PendingHTLCRouting::Receive { .. } => 0, | ||
| PendingHTLCRouting::ReceiveKeysend { .. } => 0, | ||
| }; | ||
| @@ -12449,6 +12475,7 @@ impl_writeable_tlv_based!(BlindedForward, { | ||
| (3, next_blinding_override, option), | ||
| }); | ||
| #[cfg(not(trampoline))] | ||
| impl_writeable_tlv_based_enum!(PendingHTLCRouting, | ||
| (0, Forward) => { | ||
| (0, onion_packet, required), | ||
| @@ -12477,6 +12504,42 @@ impl_writeable_tlv_based_enum!(PendingHTLCRouting, | ||
| (11, invoice_request, option), | ||
| }, | ||
| ); | ||
| #[cfg(trampoline)] | ||
ContributorAuthor There was a problem hiding this comment. it would be nice to avoid this duplication but I can't think of a way to do so Collaborator There was a problem hiding this comment. Eh, we'll survive for a month. | ||
| impl_writeable_tlv_based_enum!(PendingHTLCRouting, | ||
| (0, Forward) => { | ||
| (0, onion_packet, required), | ||
| (1, blinded, option), | ||
| (2, short_channel_id, required), | ||
| (3, incoming_cltv_expiry, option), | ||
| }, | ||
| (1, Receive) => { | ||
| (0, payment_data, required), | ||
| (1, phantom_shared_secret, option), | ||
| (2, incoming_cltv_expiry, required), | ||
| (3, payment_metadata, option), | ||
| (5, custom_tlvs, optional_vec), | ||
| (7, requires_blinded_error, (default_value, false)), | ||
| (9, payment_context, option), | ||
| }, | ||
| (2, ReceiveKeysend) => { | ||
| (0, payment_preimage, required), | ||
| (1, requires_blinded_error, (default_value, false)), | ||
| (2, incoming_cltv_expiry, required), | ||
| (3, payment_metadata, option), | ||
| (4, payment_data, option), // Added in 0.0.116 | ||
| (5, custom_tlvs, optional_vec), | ||
| (7, has_recipient_created_payment_secret, (default_value, false)), | ||
| (9, payment_context, option), | ||
| (11, invoice_request, option), | ||
| }, | ||
| (3, TrampolineForward) => { | ||
| (0, incoming_shared_secret, required), | ||
| (2, onion_packet, required), | ||
| (4, blinded, option), | ||
| (6, node_id, required), | ||
| (8, incoming_cltv_expiry, required), | ||
| } | ||
| ); | ||
| impl_writeable_tlv_based!(PendingHTLCInfo, { | ||
| (0, routing, required), | ||
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Doesn't this need to be cfg-tagged? After adding this we can panic in
process_pending_htlc_forwardswith "short_channel_id == 0 should imply any pending_forward entries are of type Receive"There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not opposed to cfg-gating, but I don't think we'll hit this panic right now since we fail during
process_pending_update_add_htlcs🤔There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
perhaps cfg-gating might prove useful for the ability to split up PRs between decrypting the inbound onion and handling forwarding, which are otherwise fairly tightly coupled
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, my concern is we end up shipping 0.2 without adding the missing cfg-gate or fully handling trampoline forwards and someone downgrades to 0.2, hitting the panic.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok, I'll cfg-gate the forwards