@rustyrussell: Protocol-triggered unilateral closure due to deadline hit on HTLC with our revoke_and_ack not known to have been received
#8218
Comments
Detailed Event Analysis
Now we are expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer.
Now we are expected to send a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment.
Now we are expecting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we still can't because we are still waiting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we still can't because we are still waiting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we still can't because we are still waiting to receive a
We are still expected to send a new commitment, and now we can.
Now we are expecting to receive a
Now we are expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer.
Now we are expected to send a
Now we're all sync'd up with our HTLCs 35771 and 35772 fully added to the channel. (The channel also has our HTLC 35770.) |
Now we are expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer.
Now we are expected to send a new commitment. We are also still expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer.
Now we are expecting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
We are still expected to send a new commitment, but we still can't because we are still waiting to receive a
We are still expected to send a new commitment, and now we can. We are also still expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer.
Now we are expecting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
We are still expected to send a new commitment, and now we can.
Now we are expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer. We are also still expected to send our own new commitment.
Now we are expecting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
This has the effect of reverting our HTLC 35772 back to the |
|
The peer reconnects to us, and we reëstablish the channel with our HTLC 35771 in the We are still expecting to receive a We receive a We are still expecting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
This has the effect of dropping our HTLC 35774. The peer reconnects to us, and we reëstablish the channel with our HTLC 35771 in the We are still expecting to receive a We receive a We are still expecting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
Now we are expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer. We are also still expected to send our own new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
This has the effect of reverting our HTLC 35772 back to the The peer reconnects to us, and we reëstablish the channel with our HTLC 35771 in the We are still expecting to receive a We receive a We are still expecting to receive a
Now we are expecting to receive a new commitment from the peer. We are also still expecting to receive a
Now we are expected to send a
Now we are expected to send a new commitment, but we can't because we are still waiting to receive a
We are still expected to send a new commitment, and now we can.
Now we are expecting to receive a
Now we're all sync'd up with our HTLCs 35771 and 35772 fully removed from the channel. Much later… The peer reconnects to us, and we reëstablish the channel with our HTLC 35773 (and four others) in the We receive a Later still… (with no intervening disconnections)
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
@rustyrussell: What follows is a detailed analysis of the failure of a very active channel due to the peer's neglect to remove an HTLC before its deadline. The HTLC in question had reached the
SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATIONstate just prior to the peer connection being lost, and we didn't receive any messages from the peer that would indicate that it had received ourrevoke_and_ack(or any message we sent subsequently), so it is possible that it did not. The peer is known to have been running LND 0.18.5.I am sure that much of the following discussion will be superfluous, but I want to give context to show that the channel was working correctly and to highlight the overlapped nature of the HTLCs, which hopefully may lend a clue as to why the peer evidently didn't believe it needed to remove one of our HTLCs before its deadline.
Overview
SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_REMOVE_HTLCRCVD_REMOVE_HTLC⇒RCVD_REMOVE_COMMITRCVD_REMOVE_COMMIT⇒SENT_REMOVE_REVOCATIONSENT_REMOVE_REVOCATION⇒SENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMITSENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_REMOVE_HTLCSENT_ADD_HTLCRCVD_REMOVE_HTLC⇒RCVD_REMOVE_COMMITRCVD_REMOVE_COMMIT⇒SENT_REMOVE_REVOCATIONSENT_ADD_HTLCSENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMIT⇒RCVD_REMOVE_ACK_REVOCATIONSENT_REMOVE_REVOCATION⇒SENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMITHTLC 35771:
SENT_ADD_HTLC⇒SENT_ADD_COMMITHTLC 35772:
SENT_ADD_HTLC⇒SENT_ADD_COMMITSENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMIT⇒RCVD_REMOVE_ACK_REVOCATIONRCVD_ADD_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_ADD_ACK_COMMITHTLC 35772:
RCVD_ADD_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_ADD_ACK_COMMITRCVD_ADD_ACK_COMMIT⇒SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATIONHTLC 35772:
RCVD_ADD_ACK_COMMIT⇒SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATIONSENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_REMOVE_HTLCSENT_ADD_HTLCSENT_ADD_HTLC⇒SENT_ADD_COMMITRCVD_REMOVE_HTLC⇒RCVD_REMOVE_COMMITRCVD_REMOVE_COMMIT⇒SENT_REMOVE_REVOCATIONSENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_REMOVE_HTLCSENT_ADD_COMMIT⇒RCVD_ADD_REVOCATIONSENT_REMOVE_REVOCATION⇒SENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMITRCVD_REMOVE_HTLC⇒RCVD_REMOVE_COMMITHTLC 35773:
RCVD_ADD_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_ADD_ACK_COMMITRCVD_REMOVE_COMMIT⇒SENT_REMOVE_REVOCATIONHTLC 35773:
RCVD_ADD_ACK_COMMIT⇒SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATIONSENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMIT⇒RCVD_REMOVE_ACK_REVOCATIONSENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_REMOVE_HTLCSENT_REMOVE_REVOCATION⇒SENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMITSENT_ADD_HTLCRCVD_REMOVE_HTLC⇒SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION(reverted)HTLC 35774: (dropped)
SENT_ADD_HTLCSENT_ADD_HTLCSENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_REMOVE_HTLCRCVD_REMOVE_HTLC⇒SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION(reverted)HTLC 35774: (dropped)
SENT_ADD_ACK_REVOCATION⇒RCVD_REMOVE_HTLCRCVD_REMOVE_HTLC⇒RCVD_REMOVE_COMMITRCVD_REMOVE_COMMIT⇒SENT_REMOVE_REVOCATIONSENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMIT⇒RCVD_REMOVE_ACK_REVOCATIONSENT_REMOVE_REVOCATION⇒SENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMITSENT_REMOVE_ACK_COMMIT⇒RCVD_REMOVE_ACK_REVOCATION(Detailed analysis of the above to follow in comments due to GitHub's post length limit.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: