lnwire

Funding (segwit+CSV)

This is two-party funder for a single Funding Transaction (more efficient and makes the channel creation atomic, but doesn't work for CSV-no-malleability-fix).

Funding Request

Someone wants to open a channel. The requester provides any inputs and relevant information on how much they want to fund and the parameters, these paramters are a proposal.

Funding Response

If the responder accepts the request, they also provide any inputs, and returns with parameters as well. These parameters are now considered "Committed" and the negotation has finished. If the requester doesn't agree with the new conditions, they stop. The response also contains the first Commitment pubkey provided by the responder, which refunds the initial balance back to both parties.

Funding SignAccept

The requester now has sufficient information to get a refund if the transaction is ever broadcast. The requester signs the Funding Transaction and this message gives the signature to the responder. The requester also provides the signature for the initial Commitment Transaction.

Funding SignComplete

The responder has sufficient information to broadcast the Funding Transaction (with the ability to receive a refund), the responder broadcasts on the blockchain and returns the txid to the requester, with the signature of the Funding Transaction. This is provided as a courtesy, it cannot be relied upon with non-cooperative channel counterparties and the Funding Transaction can be braodcast without this message being received by the requester. After the necessary number of confirmations, Lightning Network transactions can proceed.

Cooperative Channel Close

This is when either party want to close out a channel with the current balance. Requires the cooperation of both parites for this type. In the event of non-cooperation, either party may broadcast the most recent Commitment Transaction.

Close Request

One party unilaterally sends their sig and fee amount to the other party. No further channel updates are possible. In the future, we might include HTLCs in the outputs, but for now, we're assuming all HTLCs are cleared out.

Close Complete

Returns the Txid and sig as a courtesy. The counterparty might not send this if they're being non-cooperative.

Commitments and HTLCs

This is designed to be non-blocking where there can be multiple Commitments per person and the Commitments do not need to match. A HTLC is only believed to be added when it's in both parties' most recent Commitment (same with timeout/settle) and all prior Commitments not reflecting the change are revoked by the counterparty.

As a result, there can easily be hundreds of state updates/payments per second per channel.

Commitment States

Commitments:

1. HTLCs, can be modified. Any add/settlement/timeout/etc. gets added to staging.
2. Signed, more than one signed state at a time may exist per party. Takes HTLCs staging and locks it in, can now be broadcast on-chain by the counterparty.
3. Completed and Revoked, other party sends their revocation accepting this Commitment. Sending a revocation means you ACCEPT the Commitment. There should never be a case where a Commitment Signature happens and the client refusees to revoke -- instead the client should immediately close out the channel.
4. Deprecated, a commitment is old, marked as deprecated when there is a new Commitment and this one is revoked. These commitments never be broadcasted.
5. Invalid, close out channel immediately.

There can be multiple commitments going at a time per party (currently limits a total of 16 possible in-flight that can be broadcast for sanity, but there's no real limit).

For validity, all you do is ensure that the changes from the old commitment are legit (based on your HTLC/staging data) COMMIT_STAGING COMMIT_SIGNED COMMIT_COMPLETE

Messages: CommitSignature: Signature to establish COMMIT_SIGNED state CommitRevocation: Revoke prior states

ADD HTLCs

Requester Add HTLC states (Adding HTLCs):

1. Pre-staged, don't know if the other person wants it
2. Staged, both parties agree to add this HTLC. If a staging request packet is received, then BOTH PARTIES will have it in their next Commitment. Nothing is guaranteed here, but violations are treated as immediate channel closure.
3. Signed and sent the Commitment Tx to the counterparty, one should now assume that there's a possibility that this HTLC will be boradcast on-chain.
4. Completed and Revoked, counterparty has included this in the Commitment they're broadcasting and revoked their prior state. This means the Requeseter can continue to take action, since the Commitment they have, the HTLC doesn't exist (no payment), and the Responder will broadcast with the payment to the Responder. However, the Responder cannot treat the HTLC as cleared.
5. Cleared. Both parties have signed and revoked. Responder can continue routing. Make sure it's included in BOTH COMMITMENTS and ALL PREVIOUS REVOKED
6. Staging Reject, removal request, tx rejected, begin flow to reject HTLC from other channels, can only be sent during the pre-staging state

In the event that an HTLC stays in "Completed and Revoked" and it is timed out, and the counterparty refuses to add it into a new Commitment, the channel is closed out on-chain. In other words, when checking which ones to send a settle/timeout notification, do it for anything which is ADD_SIGNING_AND_REVOKING, or ADD_COMPLETE (AND ALL OTHER PRE-COMPLETE STAGES, e.g. in timeout or settlement).

As part of moving to any further stage, check if it's timed out.

If there is a request to stage and it's already staged, treat it as accepting.

When it has cleared and timed out, a timeout notification is sent.

HTLC ID numbers are uint64 and each counterparty is responsible to only make sequential/incremental, and each party can only make evens/odds (odd channel creation responder, evens channel creation initiator)

State is for YOUR signatures (what kind of action you need to do in the future) ADD_PRESTAGE ADD_STAGED ADD_SIGNING_AND_REVOKING ADD_COMPLETE ADD_REJECTED

Messages: HTLCAddRequest: Request to add to staging HTLCAddAccept: Add to staging (both parties have added when recv) HTLCAddReject: Deny add to staging (both parties don't have in staging)

HTLC Settle (payment success)

Requester Settle HTLC states (Fulfill HTLCs):

1. Pre-staged, don't know if the other person will agree to settle
2. Staged, both parties agree to settle this HTLC
3. Signed and sent Commitment Tx to the counterparty, there is now the possibility that the HTLC does not exist on-chain (of course, the Commitment includes the payment so there's no real loss of funds). In the event that it does not complete past this step, then one must close out on-chain as if it was never staged/signed in the first place and the counterparty went offline.
4. Both parties have signed and revoked, the settlement is complete (there is no intermediate step of Revoked because this is only reliable and actionable if BOTH PARTIES have updated their settlement state).

This has one less state because when adding, you're encumbering yourself. With removing, both parties are potentially encumbered, so they cannot take action until it's fully settled.

State is for your signatures SETTLE_PRESTAGE SETTLE_STAGED SETTLE_SIGNING_AND_REVOKING SETTLE_COMPLETE

Message: HTLCSettleRequest: Request to add to staging the removal from Commitment. HTLCSettleAccept: Add to staging the removal from Commitment. (There is no HTLCSettleReject as the counterparty should immediately close out or at worst ignore if it's getting garbage requests)

Timeout (falure/refund)

Requester Timeout HTLC States:

1. Pre-staged
2. Staged, both parties agree to time out the HTLC and refund the money
3. Signe dnad sent commitment to the counterparty, there is now the possibility that the transaction will no longer exist on-chain (of course, they can be redeemed either way). In the even that it does not complete past this step, then one must close out on-chain as if it was never staged/signed in the first place adn the counterparty was offline.
4. Both parties have signed and revoked, the settlement is complete (there is no intermediate step of Revoked because there is only reliable and actionable if BOTH PARTIES have updated their settlement state).

Similar to HTLC Settlement, there is one less state.

State is for your signatures TIMEOUT_PRESTAGE TIMEOUT_STAGED TIMEOUT_SIGNING_AND_REVOKING TIMEOUT_COMPLETE

Example (this section to be removed)

A bit redundant, but this was written first... will merge with "Add" example

Adding a single HTLC process:

1. Requester flags as pre-staged, and sends an "add requeset"
2. Responder decides whether to add. If they don't, they invalidate it. If they do, they send a message accepting the staging request. It is now marked as staged on both sides and is ready to be accepted into a Commitment.
3. When a party wants to update with a new Commitment, they send a new signed Commitment, this includes data that the HTLC is part of it. Let's say it's the Requester that sends this new Commitment. As a result, the HTLC is marked BY THE RESPONDER as Signed. It's only when the Responder includes a transaction including the new HTLC in a new Commitment that the Requester marks it as Signed.
4. Upon the Responder receiving the new Commitment, they send the revocation for the old Commitment, and commit to broadcasting only the new one.
5. The Requester marks the HTLC as complete, but the Responder waits until they receive a Commitment (and the old one is revoked) before marking it as complete on the Responder's end.
6. When both parties have the new Commitments and the old ones are revoked, then the HTLC is marked as complete

The two Commitment Transactions may not be completely in sync, but that's OK! What's added in both (and removed in both) are regarded as valid and locked-in. If it's only added to one, then it's regarded as in-transit and can go either way.

The behavior is to sign after all additions/removals/cancellations, but there may be multiple in the staging buffer.

Each party has their own revocation height (for the other party to use), and they may be different.