Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Lightning Specification Meeting 2024/06/17 #1172

Closed
9 of 22 tasks
t-bast opened this issue Jun 17, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed
9 of 22 tasks

Lightning Specification Meeting 2024/06/17 #1172

t-bast opened this issue Jun 17, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator

t-bast commented Jun 17, 2024

The meeting will take place on Monday 2024/06/17 at 8pm UTC (5:30am Adelaide time) on Libera Chat IRC #lightning-dev. It is open to the public.

A video link is available for higher bandwidth communication: https://meet.jit.si/Lightning-Spec-Meeting

Recently Updated Proposals / Seeking Review

This section contains changes that have been opened or updated recently and need feedback from the meeting participants.

Stale Proposals

This section contains pending changes that may not need feedback from the meeting participants, unless someone explicitly asks for it during the meeting. These changes are usually waiting for implementation work to happen to drive more feedback.

Waiting for interop

This section contains changes that have been conceptually ACKed and are waiting for at least two implementations to fully interoperate.
They most likely don't need to be covered during the meeting, unless someone asks for updates.

Long Term Updates

This section contains long-term changes that need review, but require a substantial implementation effort.

@t-bast t-bast pinned this issue Jun 17, 2024
@Roasbeef
Copy link
Collaborator

sftu:

  • to add to the spec: SHOULD disconnect if not complete in 60 seconds
    • general timeout on stfu period
  • should we add a message for disconnect?
    * only needed if the initiator isn't doing anything
    * so would we have an application level?
    * or does is just hide other bugs
  • eclair + lnd have interop in the latest version
  • heading to merge town

liquidity ads:

  • designed to be extended in two dimensions
  • how to negotiate fees, and how you pay it
    • in the PR, compute: compute fees based on the base fee + proportional, etc
    • how you pay in PR: pay from the interactive tx, etc
  • added: when you buy, can say the payment type is from channel balance or future HTLCs, etc
    • so then can pay the fees afterwards
    • later able to look at lease duration, and if you'd change the scripts or not, etc, etc
  • note to reviewers: prob better to look at the JSON test vectors
  • not to impls: writing code to define the types can also help out

offers:

  • have testnet node, can relay + pay and recv, etc, etc
  • ready to start cross compat for this version
  • lnd doing further work on blinded paths recv+send, have mpp send over multiple blinded paths working
  • should we disallow having a node ID if you also have a blinded path
    • use case: able to sign stuff, etc -- but then how you get to me is a mystery
    • may need a spec change, current version doesn't allow both to exist
    • have another encoding format w/ 0x04 or 0x05, basically a new pubkey type that informs how to parse
      • also used to allow a node ID to be there, and as a hint that you should open a channel on the fly, etc
    • also just a pubkey, not necessarily a node ID -- call it something diff?
      • signing_id, signing_pubkey, payment_key, invoice_key ?
  • other payer_id value, some apps may want this to stay the same when paying ppl on a contact list
  • new project helping w/ interop testing:
    • https://github.com/LN-Zap/bolt12-playground
    • found interop bugs
      • CLN doesn't pay offers that don't have blinded paths
      • something else with differing value amounts, no amount, but description
      • does it test error cases (playground)?
        • if you have a blinded path, but can't relay, or don't have enough liquidity
        • ppl should use the proper errors, wouldn't come up when testing the happy path
  • behavior re requesting many paths
    • some try 10 times (or use 10 paths?) when trying to fetch an invoice the first time
  • wanting experimental range for TLVs in offers, specific range stuff should be in
    • to carve out a stub range

dyn commits:

  • keagan pushing forward w/ impl of the flow control param changes, so stuff like max HTLC, etc, etc
  • static remote key now compulsory
    • CLN wanting to give ppl a path to update them, also with legacy anchor
      • has the older version CLN specific to do a custom thing to update
    • what do the others want to do?
    • node ann shows that understand anchor, but not existing chan types
      • could add extra feature bits as telemetry source

taproot:

  • to clarify the way you detect a force close
    • can't rely on OP_DROP presence, instead need to do deeper pattern matching
    • to update spec and test vectors

taproot gossip:

  • gotta deal with needing to broadcast both until $FUTURE_BLOCK_HEIGHT
  • need to circle back in spec re burst budget for block height based rate limiting

compressed bolt 12:

  • to be able to pack in more, since merkle tree validation w/ sig validation, etc, etc

@t-bast t-bast unpinned this issue Jun 26, 2024
@t-bast t-bast closed this as completed Jun 26, 2024
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants