-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 890
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
bolt1: init tlvs set remote address #4864
bolt1: init tlvs set remote address #4864
Conversation
16c3f6b
to
aacd2d5
Compare
5c886f3
to
c87890e
Compare
dd984dc
to
13d02a8
Compare
13d02a8
to
4df5fd9
Compare
4df5fd9
to
3cc2d85
Compare
ec18362
to
fe2d9d2
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, just a small comment
15a51ac
to
1381544
Compare
1381544
to
6278b85
Compare
@rustyrussell I now use |
6278b85
to
c573c15
Compare
Just a testflake in tests/test_plugin.py::test_coin_movement_notices |
Note: Bolt lightning/bolts#917 has been merged yesterday. |
c573c15
to
ed20b5a
Compare
squashed some commits and removed unused struct. |
ed20b5a
to
0196fa5
Compare
Resolved conflicts and rebased on current master |
0196fa5
to
bcce20f
Compare
Unfortunately we can't do any smart parsing here since wiregen does not support switch/type cases for different substructure unions yet. So just give us a pointer we can use.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK bcce20f
Comments appear to have been addressed.
Changelog-Added: Protocol: set remote_addr on init tlvs
bcce20f
to
7baae67
Compare
I just force pushed @cdecker 's changes/remarks |
Ack 7baae67 |
This implements RFC lightning/bolts#917 that
will add the IP
remote_addr
to init tlvs on incoming IP connections.The other node may decide to use that for public IP detection behind a NAT.
Currently it only logs this information.
It has already been cross-tested with ACINQ/eclair#1973
I think we should decouple this from the actual PR that does use that new information,
as several options are thinkable, and also because we can speed up cross testing this
way to get the RFC done quicker.
Next Steps: What do we do when we receive a
remote_addr
?remote_addr
to consider it valid.remote_addr
by making a test connection to ourself (can work, must not).remote_addr
considered valid and not yet known, insert this into annode_annoucment
update, if: