Open and accept zero reserve channels#4428
Open and accept zero reserve channels#4428tankyleo wants to merge 6 commits intolightningdevkit:mainfrom
Conversation
|
👋 Thanks for assigning @TheBlueMatt as a reviewer! |
`ChannelContext::do_accept_channel_checks`, `ChannelContext::new_for_outbound_channel`, `ChannelContext::new_for_inbound_channel`, `InboundV1Channel::new`, `OutboundV1Channel::new`.
tankyleo
force-pushed
the
2026-02-zero-reserve
branch
from
ffa1657 to
5fa3a7c
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4428 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 85.94% 85.91% -0.03%
==========================================
Files 159 159
Lines 104644 105103 +459
Branches 104644 105103 +459
==========================================
+ Hits 89934 90298 +364
- Misses 12204 12300 +96
+ Partials 2506 2505 -1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
TheBlueMatt
left a comment
TheBlueMatt
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
chanmon_consistency needs to be updated to have a 0-reserve channel or two (I believe we now have three channels between each pair of peers, so we can just do it on a subset of them, in fact we could have three separate channel types for better coverage).
| /// Creates a new outbound channel to the given remote node and with the given value. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// The only difference between this method and [`ChannelManager::create_channel`] is that this method sets | ||
| /// the reserve the counterparty must keep at all times in the channel to zero. This allows the counterparty to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: If that's the only difference let's say create_channel_to_trusted_peer_0_reserve? Nice to be explicit, imo.
|
|
||
| let channel_value_satoshis = | ||
| our_funding_contribution_sats.saturating_add(msg.common_fields.funding_satoshis); | ||
| // TODO(zero_reserve): support reading and writing the `disable_channel_reserve` field |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two questions. Shouldn't we check that if a channel has the 0-reserve feature bit and if it is fail if the user isn't accepting 0-reserve? Also why shouldn't we just set it now? I'm not sure we need to bother with a staging bit, really, honestly...
3 participants
Fixes #1801