--- Log opened Wed Nov 17 00:00:35 2021
00:01 -!- b10c [uid500648@ilkley.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-rust
03:10 -!- b10c [uid500648@ilkley.irccloud.com] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
03:25 -!- sebx2a [sid356034@uxbridge.irccloud.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
03:25 -!- stick [sid403625@user/prusnak] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
03:27 -!- sebx2a [sid356034@uxbridge.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-rust
03:28 -!- stick [sid403625@user/prusnak] has joined #bitcoin-rust
03:40 < dr-orlovsky> andytoshi: great, thank you! (was afk from IRC) 3 ACKs not seem to be managable
03:42 < dr-orlovsky> sanket1729_: Is Kixunil on IRC here?
03:42 < dr-orlovsky> previously I have seen him, but not now
05:51 -!- valwal [~valwal@70.107.207.192] has quit [Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)]
05:51 -!- valwal [~valwal@70.107.207.192] has joined #bitcoin-rust
06:08 -!- b10c [uid500648@ilkley.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-rust
07:25 -!- willcl_ark [~quassel@user/willcl-ark/x-8282106] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
07:27 -!- willcl_ark [~quassel@user/willcl-ark/x-8282106] has joined #bitcoin-rust
08:43 < BlueMatt> ariard: thanks! will take a look after lunch!
09:54 < BlueMatt> ariard: oops, looks like it needs a trivial rebase. this has cleaned up nicely. I'll give it some fuzz iterations but maybe we just land it and fix any failures later at this point, unless its trivial.
10:56 < BlueMatt> ariard: would you prefer if I hold https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-lightning/pull/1162 until 1054 lands? I dont want to hold up 1162 too long but if we land 1054 like tomorrow or so I can rebase on that.
11:52 < ariard> BlueMatt: i've seen your comments, addressing+rebasing today, yes happy if we can get 1054 before 1162 i can have a look on it too :) 
11:53 < ariard> i think we could refactor build_commitments and merge it with other htlc accounting helpers to have a far more cleanly internal API, though better deferred to future work
11:54 < BlueMatt> thanks
11:54 < BlueMatt> yea, i mostly just meant i think the new api bits there would be clearer if they returned the amounts to each counteraprty as actually included in the transaction
11:54 < BlueMatt> ie less fee and considering the dust limits
11:54 < BlueMatt> instead of just returning "here's what i thought about paying, but then maybe modified it later"
11:54 < BlueMatt> which i think would further clean up some callsites
13:20 < valwal> BlueMatt, ariard: re the recent changes to 1054 -- i take it there was an issue with our calculation of the holder balance when checking for feerate affordability, basically? 
13:22 < BlueMatt> i believe the fuzzer found several issues: yes, there was at least one issue where we werent considering pending htlcs which would change our balance and were just looking at amount_to_self_msat. further, there was an issue where we werent re-checking the update_fee-sending limits when we released an update_fee from the holding cell
13:24 < valwal> yeah the holding cell changes make sense. ok cool, we were misisng all that `value_to_self_msat_offset` logic from `build_commitment_transaction` i guess
13:27 < BlueMatt> yea
13:27 < BlueMatt> exactly that
13:38 -!- biteskola [~biteskola@184.76.76.188.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-rust
13:38 -!- biteskola is now known as aitorjs
15:19 -!- aitorjs [~biteskola@184.76.76.188.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
17:09 < ariard> BlueMatt: not as simple, see https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-lightning/pull/1054#discussion_r751796476, tbh i would like first to remove redundant checks in `send_htlc`
17:11 < ariard> valwal: yes the fuzzer finds multiple issues, at least one antecendent to 1054, namely that we would use simply the value_to_self_msat, but not the pending outbound *and* inbound values for few affordance checks
17:11 < ariard> the release an update_fee from the holding cell is "pure" 1054
17:13 -!- aitorjs [~biteskola@184.76.76.188.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-rust
17:14 < ariard> BlueMatt, valwal: i've addressed few of your comments and bookmarked the other ones in a follow-up issue https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-lightning/issues/1175, better to bikeshed an interface in a newer scoped PR imo
17:15 < ariard> i can take some on 1056, if nested, i guess
17:21 < ariard> maybe we can completely get ride off of self.value_to_self_msat, and just replace by call to build_commitment_transaction.{holder,counterparty}_balances
17:22 < ariard> where balances are defined pre-fees, pre-dust-threshold
17:37 -!- aitorjs [~biteskola@184.76.76.188.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
18:00 -!- b10c [uid500648@ilkley.irccloud.com] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
20:24 -!- johncantrell97[m [~johncantr@2001:470:69fc:105::1:3780] has joined #bitcoin-rust
--- Log closed Thu Nov 18 00:00:39 2021