LSPS1- Channel request #8
Conversation
| let channel_id = self.request_to_cid.remove(request_id)?; | ||
|
|
||
| if let Some(channel) = self.channels_by_id.get_mut(&channel_id) { | ||
| if channel.state == state { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mh, IIUC this means we would just remove the channel and fail silently if the channel is in a wrong state? We should probably return an error and at least log this, even though it should never happen.
| *self.peer_manager.lock().unwrap() = Some(peer_manager); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn connect_to_counterparty(&self, counterparty_node_id: PublicKey) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm confused: what is the purpose of this method and why are we generating a random channel id?
Srg213
force-pushed
the
lsps1
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cde4adc
to
759f2ec
Compare
| // confirms_within_blocks: Option<u32>, | ||
| // channel_expiry_blocks: Option<u32>, | ||
| announce_channel: bool, | ||
| order_id: Option<OrderId>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See above, if we store the Order object that lead to the channel, this field would be superfluous.
| Ok(()) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /* No errors for getinfo method */ |
|
Would love to land this first work-in-progress draft so that the code can be included in the upcoming project restructuring. For this, could you resolve any conflicts with current main and make sure it compiles and passes tests? |
| { | ||
| entropy_source: ES, | ||
| peer_manager: Mutex<Option<Arc<PeerManager<Descriptor, CM, RM, OM, L, CMH, NS>>>>, | ||
| channel_manager: Arc<ChannelManager<M, T, ES, NS, SP, F, R, L>>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can use the AChannelManager trait to at least make this a bit easier now.
|
|
||
| impl InboundRequestState { | ||
| fn info_received(&self, versions: Vec<u16>, options: OptionsSupported) -> Result<Self, ChannelStateError> { | ||
| let max_shared_version = versions |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note that we're in the process of dropping versioning support in all specs, so all the corresponding code can be removed: BitcoinAndLightningLayerSpecs/lsp#63
Srg213
force-pushed
the
lsps1
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b37b754
to
f1e259e
Compare
|
@Srg213 Thank you for the rebase and addressing most of the comments! If you don't mind, could you undraft this PR? I'd then land it and start the restructuring work early next week. Any further changes to make this work could then happen as follow-ups. |
No description provided.