Rusty Russell [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2021-04-24 📝 Original message: Joost Jager <joost.jager ...
📅 Original date posted:2021-04-24
📝 Original message:
Joost Jager <joost.jager at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> But Joost pointed out that you need to know the node_id of the next node
>> though: this isn't quite true, since if the node_id is wrong the spec
>> says you should send an `update_fail_malformed_htlc` with failure code
>> invalid_onion_hmac, which node N turns into its own failure message.
>> Perhaps it should convert it to `unknown_next_peer` instead? This isn't
>> a common error on the modern network; I think our onion implementations
>> have been rock solid.
>>
>
> Isn't this what I am suggesting here?
> https://twitter.com/joostjgr/status/1385150318959341569
Oops, I didn't read the second part of your tweet properly.
Sorry: this was right there indeed.
Thanks!
Rusty.
📝 Original message:
Joost Jager <joost.jager at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> But Joost pointed out that you need to know the node_id of the next node
>> though: this isn't quite true, since if the node_id is wrong the spec
>> says you should send an `update_fail_malformed_htlc` with failure code
>> invalid_onion_hmac, which node N turns into its own failure message.
>> Perhaps it should convert it to `unknown_next_peer` instead? This isn't
>> a common error on the modern network; I think our onion implementations
>> have been rock solid.
>>
>
> Isn't this what I am suggesting here?
> https://twitter.com/joostjgr/status/1385150318959341569
Oops, I didn't read the second part of your tweet properly.
Sorry: this was right there indeed.
Thanks!
Rusty.