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

Extensible Liquidity Ads #1153

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator

@t-bast t-bast commented Apr 15, 2024

Add the ability to advertise rates at which nodes wish to sell their liquidity. Buyers can then connect to sellers and request liquidity, at one of the advertised rates.

This can be used when creating a dual-funded channel, where both participants contribute to the funding transaction, and one of them is paid for (some of) their contribution. This can also be used to splice additional liquidity into existing channels, when splicing is supported.

We introduce an extensible payment_type field to control how the funding fees are paid. The only payment_type currently defined pays funding fees from the buyer's channel balance during the interactive-tx session, but it is easy to introduce different payment_types (to pay the fees using HTLCs for example).

LSPs may for example want to offer funding where fees are not paid immediately when creating the transaction, but instead taken from every future HTLC relayed on that channel (see lightning/blips#36). We create the ability for bLIPs to introduce new payment types, without affecting the BOLTs.

We don't add any constraints to the commitment transactions. Sellers should keep the channel open for at least a month, but there is no way to guarantee that. The seller could immediately close the channel, or splice funds out. It is up to the buyer to then blacklist that seller.

This PR is a concurrent design for #1145.

Credits to @niftynei for the original design.

07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator Author

t-bast commented Apr 15, 2024

@TheBlueMatt I believe this kind of design leaves enough room for introducing different types of leases and fee mechanisms, and would make it easy to support all LSP use-cases. It also makes it easy for bLIPs to introduce lease types, that would keep using most of the liquidity ads mechanisms. Let me know what you think!

07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Apr 15, 2024
Add types and codecs for the extensible liquidity ads format proposed
in lightning/bolts#1153.
Copy link
Contributor

@JssDWt JssDWt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

From the first look this looks like a good extensible model for channel leases. I didn't find any obvious gaps.

07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
02-peer-protocol.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@tnull tnull left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Did a first pass, found just a few nits and questions so far.

I also like the extensible model, but have yet to spend more time thinking about the details regarding how this would work in a JIT flow exactly.

02-peer-protocol.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
02-peer-protocol.md Show resolved Hide resolved
07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request May 14, 2024
Add types and codecs for the extensible liquidity ads format proposed
in lightning/bolts#1153.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request May 14, 2024
The last commit of lightning/bolts#1153
introduces a separate `payment_type` field, that allows extending the
ways fees can be paid.
Copy link
Collaborator

@niftynei niftynei left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

While this is a considerable evolution of the original proposal, I think it's fair to ask that that I get at least a by-line credit the commit description for this. For example something like

Credit to: @niftynei for the original liquidity ads proposal

02-peer-protocol.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator Author

t-bast commented May 21, 2024

While this is a considerable evolution of the original proposal, I think it's fair to ask that that I get at least a by-line credit the commit description for this. For example something like

Of course, I'd like to re-arrange the commits once reviewed (the first commit is only here to help guide the review and shouldn't be included on master IMO), once we get closer to a final version I'll clean-up the commits and add credits!

t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request May 24, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request May 29, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Jun 4, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Jun 4, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Jun 13, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Jun 14, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Jun 14, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Jun 14, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Jun 17, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
07-routing-gossip.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Aug 28, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Aug 28, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
@t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator Author

t-bast commented Sep 3, 2024

Note to reviewers: I slightly changed the format of funding rates in the last commit to include an additional fee for channel creation. As detailed in the commit message, creating a new channel doesn't have the same cost as adding liquidity to an existing channel (in terms of resources and future on-chain usage): this lets node operators collect a different fee for channel creation to hedge the cost of a future (force) close.

t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Sep 3, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Sep 5, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Sep 13, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2024
We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2024
The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2024
* Add support for extensible liquidity ads

The initiator of `open_channel2`, `tx_init_rbf` and `splice_init` can
request funding from the remote node. The non-initiator node will:

- let the open-channel-interceptor plugin decide whether to provide
  liquidity for new channels or not, and how much
- always honor liquidity requests on existing channels (RBF and splice)
  when funding rates have been configured

Liquidity ads are included in the `node_announcement` message, which
lets buyers compare sellers and connect to sellers that provide rates
they are comfortable with. They are also included in the `init` message
which allows providing different rates to specific peers.

This implements lightning/bolts#1153. We
currently use the temporary tlv tag 1339 while we're waiting for
feedback on the spec proposal.

* Add `channelCreationFee` to liquidity ads

Creating a new channel has an additional cost compared to adding
liquidity to an existing channel: the channel will be closed in the
future, which will require paying on-chain fees. Node operators can
include a `channel-creation-fee-satoshis` in their liquidity ads to
cover some of that future cost.

* Add liquidity purchases to the `AuditDb`

Whenever liquidity is purchased, we store it in the `AuditDb`. This lets
node operators gather useful statistics on their peers, and which ones
are actively using the liquidity that is purchased.

We store minimal information about the liquidity ads itself to be more
easily compatible with potential changes in the spec.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Sep 25, 2024
* Remove `please_open_channel`

It is usually the wallet that decides that it needs a channel, but we
want the LSP to pay the commit fees to allow the wallet user to empty
its wallet over lightning. We previously used a `please_open_channel`
message that was sent by the wallet to the LSP, but it doesn't work
well with liquidity ads.

We remove that message and instead send `open_channel` from the wallet
but with a custom channel flag that tells the LSP that they should be
paying the commit fees. This only works if the LSP adds funds on their
side of the channel, so we couple that with liquidity ads to request
funds from the LSP.

We also add a `recommended_feerates` message from the LSP which lets
the wallet know the on-chain feerates that the LSP will accept for
on-chain funding operations, since those feerates are set in the
`open_channel` message that is now sent by the wallet.

* Add liquidity ads to the channel opening flow

We previously only used liquidity ads with splicing: we now support it
during the initial channel opening flow as well. This lets us add more
unit tests, including tests for the case where the node receiving the
`open_channel` message is responsible for paying the commitment fees.

We also update liquidity ads to use the latest version of the spec from
lightning/bolts#1153. This introduces more ways
of paying the liquidity fees, to support on-the-fly funding without
existing channel balance (not implemented in this commit).

Note that we need some backwards-compatibility with the previous
liquidity ads types in our state serialization code: when we're in the
middle of signing a splice transaction, we may have a legacy liquidity
lease in our splice status. We ignore it when finalizing the splice: the
only consequence is that we won't store an entry in our DB for that
lease, but the channel will otherwise work correctly.

* Replace `pay_to_open` with `will_add_htlc`

We replace the previous pay-to-open protocol with a new protocol that
only relies on liquidity ads for paying fees. We simply transmit HTLCs
that cannot be relayed on existing channels with a new message called
`will_add_htlc` that contains all the HTLC data.

The recipient can verify that the HTLC that would match this promise is
valid, and if it wishes to accept that payment, it can trigger a channel
open or a splice to purchase the required inbound liquidity. Once that
transaction completes, the sender will relay HTLCs matching the proposed
`will_add_htlc`, which completes the payment.

If the fees for the inbound liquidity purchase couldn't be paid from the
previous channel balance, they can be taken from the HTLCs relayed after
the funding transaction. When that happens, one side needs to trust that
the other will comply. Each side can independently configure the options
they're comfortable with, depending on whether they trust their peer or
not.

* Add `channelCreationFee` to liquidity ads

Creating a new channel has an additional cost compared to adding
liquidity to an existing channel: the channel will be closed in the
future, which will require paying on-chain fees. Node operators can
include a `channel-creation-fee-satoshis` in their liquidity ads to
cover some of that future cost.

* Clarify received amount before or after fees

We clarify some of our event types that previously had an `amount`
field to detail whether this amount includes fees or not.

This impacts:

- SwapInEvents.Accepted
- StoreIncomingPayment.ViaNewChannel
- StoreIncomingPayment.ViaSpliceIn
- Origin.OnChainWallet
- Origin.OffChainPayment

There was an inconsistency in the `ViaSpliceIn` event, where in some
cases we used the received amount, and in others the amount with fees.

* Remove `minInboundLiquidityTarget`

We previously forced wallets to purchase additional inbound liquidity
every time an on-chain transaction was created. We now allow wallets
to disable automatic liquidity purchases: the LSP will need to add
enough funds on their side to cover the commitment fees, which the
wallet won't be paying for. But we still make a dummy purchase of 1 sat
to ensure that the liquidity ads flow is used and the wallet refunds
the mining fees paid by the LSP.

* Read remote funding rates from their `init` message

Instead of using a hard-coded value from `WalletParams`, we read the
liquidity funding rates from our peer's `init` message.
Add the ability to advertise rates at which nodes wish to sell their
liquidity. Buyers can then connect to sellers and request liquidity,
at one of the advertised rates.

This can be used when creating a dual-funded channel, where both
participants contribute to the funding transaction, and one of them
is paid for (some of) their contribution. This can also be used to
splice additional liquidity into existing channels, when splicing is
supported.

We introduce an extensible `payment_type` field to control how the
funding fees are paid. The only `payment_type` currently defined pays
funding fees from the buyer's channel balance during the interactive-tx
session, but it is easy to introduce different `payment_type`s (to pay
the fees using HTLCs for example).

We don't add any constraints to the commitment transactions. Sellers
should keep the channel open for at least a month, but there is no way
to guarantee that. The seller could immediately close the channel, or
splice funds out. It is up to the buyer to then blacklist that seller.

Credits to @niftynei for the original design.
Creating a new channel has an additional cost compared to adding
liquidity to an existing channel: the channel will be closed in the
future, which will require paying on-chain fees. Node operators can
include some `channel_creation_fee_sat` to their liquidity ads to
cover some of that future cost.
Every RBF attempts provided the opportunity to modify the liquidity
purchase: we thus must explicitly state whether we're purchasing
liquidity in `tx_init_rbf`.

We also update the TLV tags to prevent a conflict with the released
version of `cln` which already uses those TLVs with an experimental
format. This will make the migration to the new TLVs easier for them
without disrupting existing users.
@t-bast
Copy link
Collaborator Author

t-bast commented Oct 10, 2024

@niftynei I updated the TLV fields in 910c070 to prevent conflicts with existing versions of cln.

t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2024
Update our codecs to use the official version of the liquidity ads
messages and fields. The specification can be found here:
lightning/bolts#1153.
t-bast added a commit to ACINQ/eclair that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2024
Update our codecs to use the official version of the liquidity ads
messages and fields. The specification can be found here:
lightning/bolts#1153.
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.

6 participants