Skip to content

Conversation

@t-bast
Copy link
Member

@t-bast t-bast commented Jul 29, 2025

We refactor our transactions handling and our closing data to match the changes made in eclair to support taproot channels and commitment upgrades during splices.

The architecture matches the change made in eclair, up to changes from ACINQ/eclair#3118

@t-bast t-bast force-pushed the refactor-transactions-and-commitment branch 2 times, most recently from dbe527d to f4b78c0 Compare August 27, 2025 08:07
@t-bast t-bast force-pushed the refactor-transactions-and-commitment branch from a2c8b09 to 2e950c7 Compare September 4, 2025 12:15
@t-bast t-bast force-pushed the refactor-transactions-and-commitment branch from 8773063 to ba12721 Compare September 26, 2025 13:00
We refactor our transactions handling and our closing data to match the
changes made in `eclair` to support taproot channels and commitment
upgrades during splices.

The architecture matches the change made in eclair, up to changes from
ACINQ/eclair#3118
@t-bast t-bast force-pushed the refactor-transactions-and-commitment branch from ba12721 to 397fef5 Compare October 1, 2025 15:35
Copy link
Member

@pm47 pm47 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM:

  • consistent with the eclair data model
  • end-to-end tests pass against eclair

@t-bast t-bast requested a review from pm47 October 1, 2025 15:59
@t-bast t-bast merged commit c5b5b03 into master Oct 1, 2025
2 checks passed
@t-bast t-bast deleted the refactor-transactions-and-commitment branch October 1, 2025 16:01
sstone added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2025
#800 included a lot of improvements on our data structure and removed data that was either redondant or could be re-computed.
This means that serialised channel states are smaller, and we can increase the number of pending HTLCs to 18 and stay below the 65 Kb size limit for LN messages.

Note that this applies to new channels only: existing ones will still use the previous value of 12 pending HTLCs.
sstone added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2025
#800 included a lot of improvements on our data structure and removed data that was either redondant or could be re-computed.
This means that serialised channel states are smaller, and we can increase the number of pending HTLCs to 18 and stay below the 65 Kb size limit for LN messages.

Note that this applies to new channels only: existing ones will still use the previous value of 12 pending HTLCs.
sstone added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2025
#800 included a lot of improvements on our data structure and removed data that was either redondant or could be re-computed.
This means that serialised channel states are smaller, and we can increase the number of pending HTLCs to 18 and stay below the 65 Kb size limit for LN messages.

Note that this applies to new channels only: existing ones will still use the previous value of 12 pending HTLCs.
sstone added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2025
#800 included a lot of improvements on our data structure and removed data that was either redondant or could be re-computed.
This means that serialised channel states are smaller, and we can increase the number of pending HTLCs to 18 and stay below the 65 Kb size limit for LN messages.

Note that this applies to new channels only: existing ones will still use the previous value of 12 pending HTLCs.
ebonyschneider462359 added a commit to ebonyschneider462359/lightning-kmp that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2025
ACINQ/lightning-kmp#800 included a lot of improvements on our data structure and removed data that was either redondant or could be re-computed.
This means that serialised channel states are smaller, and we can increase the number of pending HTLCs to 18 and stay below the 65 Kb size limit for LN messages.

Note that this applies to new channels only: existing ones will still use the previous value of 12 pending HTLCs.
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.

3 participants