bLIP-51: Specify invalid token error code#68
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 1 commit intolightning:masterfrom Jan 14, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Previously the spec said that the LSP should return 'an error' in case of an invalid or unrecogized token. To keep the approach similar to what we do in bLIP-52 (where we specify a particular error code for this case), we now here specify an error code to be used in this case.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2025
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2025
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2025
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2025
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 12, 2025
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2025
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
JssDWt
reviewed
Dec 18, 2025
| | -32602 | Invalid params | {"property": %invalid_property%, "message": %human_message% } | Invalid method parameter(s). | | ||
| | 001 | Client rejected | {"message": %human_message% } | [LSPS0.client_rejected_error][] | | ||
| | 100 | Option mismatch | {"property": %option_mismatch_property%, "message": %human_message% } | The order doesnt match the options defined in `lsps1.get_info.options`. | | ||
| | 102 | Unrecognized or stale token | {} | The provided token was unrecognized or stale. | |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Out of curiosity, why not 101?
Because 101 is the get_info "Not found" error code. AFAIR, error codes should be unique per spec, not per request type.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see, it might make sense to define the errors in a central place then.
JssDWt
approved these changes
Jan 12, 2026
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 4, 2026
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 11, 2026
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 11, 2026
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 18, 2026
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2026
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
tnull
added a commit
to tnull/rust-lightning
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2026
We add a method that allows the LSP to signal to the client the token they used was invalid. We use the `102` error code as proposed in lightning/blips#68.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Previously the spec said that the LSP should return 'an error' in case of an invalid or unrecogized token. To keep the approach similar to what we do in bLIP-52 (where we specify a particular error code for this case), we now here specify an error code to be used in this case.