Skip to content

Expose channel fees in ChannelDetails - #824

Closed
valentinewallace wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom
valentinewallace:listchans-expose-feerates
Closed

Expose channel fees in ChannelDetails#824
valentinewallace wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom
valentinewallace:listchans-expose-feerates

Conversation

@valentinewallace

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We need this to make route hints for invoices.

We need this to make route hints for invoices.
@valentinewallace
valentinewallace force-pushed the listchans-expose-feerates branch from 7064d27 to 7c7c08b Compare March 4, 2021 00:40
@TheBlueMatt

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Fee charged by us is usually not very useful/interesting, I suppose we could export it, but you almost certainly want the fee charged by our counterparty for inbound information, not the other way around - I believe thats the actual reason for #207.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Mar 4, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

Merging #824 (7c7c08b) into main (4894d52) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 50.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #824      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.97%   90.95%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          48       48              
  Lines       26452    26456       +4     
==========================================
- Hits        24064    24063       -1     
- Misses       2388     2393       +5     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
lightning/src/routing/router.rs 96.86% <ø> (ø)
lightning/src/ln/channelmanager.rs 85.22% <50.00%> (-0.07%) ⬇️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs 96.94% <0.00%> (-0.06%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 4894d52...7c7c08b. Read the comment docs.

@valentinewallace

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Dangit, OK revising approach...

amackillop added a commit to moneydevkit/rust-lightning that referenced this pull request Aug 7, 2026
The v0.2.5 rebase dropped the MDK-799 dual-advertise commits because
upstream 0.2.2 renumbered SplicePrototype to bit 63, turning their
clear_splicing() ACINQ carve-out into a production-bit strip. That left
bit-155-only clients unable to splice: we neither advertised a bit they
recognize nor recognized the bit they advertise, so LSPS4 would fall
back to opening a second channel on every liquidity top-up.

We have to assume such clients exist: client version telemetry (MDK-424,
lightning-node#824) has not shipped, and the legacy e2e jobs cannot
distinguish a splice from the channel-open fallback by design.

Reintroduce the bit under a new SplicePrototypeLegacy feature (155 is
unused upstream now) and accept it at the splice_channel gate. The wire
protocol is unchanged between v0.2 and v0.2.5 (msgs.rs and
interactivetxs.rs are byte-identical across the patch series), so a
0.2.5 LSP can splice with a v0.2-fork client; only the negotiation bit
moved. The ACINQ carve-out returns unchanged: eclair rejects an Init
carrying both 155 (their pre-standard splice bit) and 63.

Sunset: once lightningdevkit#824 ships and shows no bit-155 clients, drop the
define_feature block, the set_splicing_legacy_optional() call, the
strip, and the gate's legacy arm.
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