Present a configured fee claim on register_node#26
Merged
Conversation
Read fee_claim into NodeConfig and hand it to the LSPS4 client builder, which forwards it on register_node. The LSP verifies the grant and, if valid, drops the node off the standard 2% skim. The claim is node config, not a secret, so it lives in [node] fee_claim. The MDK_FEE_CLAIM env var is a fallback for deployments that inject config through the environment. config.toml wins when both are set. Unset everywhere is the default until the issuer starts minting, which leaves fee_claim None and the node on the standard policy. The ldk-node bumps carry the client plumbing for the third set_liquidity_source_lsps4 argument: - ldk-node (variant client dep) f13fcead -> 48cb27f8, pulling rust-lightning 9b5f40f0 (M1 + M2 + the register_node fee_claim parameter). - ldk-node-lsp (lsp-0.7.0 dev-dep) e5fcce06 -> b0dee519, pulling rust-lightning bdcdf57d (M1 + M2, no client parameter; this copy is the verifier). The two pull different rust-lightning revs: existing arrangement, not a regression. Client and LSP talk over the wire, so duplicate compilation is fine. The integration test runs a node with a claim bound to its node id and asserts the full 100k arrives instead of 98k, mirroring test_getbalance_after_payment. It only passes if the LSP verifies the signature, so it covers the whole loop. The claim hex is minted offline against the in-tree issuer secret; the regeneration recipe is in a comment next to it. MDK-998 tracks replacing it with a reusable mnemonic-bound vector once lightning-liquidity exposes a mint helper.
amackillop
force-pushed
the
austin_mdk-981_configure-fee-claims
branch
from
2f954ac to
f5043ce
Compare
Merged
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Read fee_claim into NodeConfig and hand it to the LSPS4 client builder, which forwards it on register_node. The LSP verifies the grant and, if valid, drops the node off the standard 2% skim.
The claim is node config, not a secret, so it lives in [node] fee_claim. The MDK_FEE_CLAIM env var is a fallback for deployments that inject config through the environment. config.toml wins when both are set. Unset everywhere is the default until the issuer starts minting, which leaves fee_claim None and the node on the standard policy.
The ldk-node bumps carry the client plumbing for the third set_liquidity_source_lsps4 argument:
The integration test runs a node with a claim bound to its node id and asserts the full 100k arrives instead of 98k, mirroring test_getbalance_after_payment. It only passes if the LSP verifies the signature, so it covers the whole loop. The claim hex is minted offline against the in-tree issuer secret; the regeneration recipe is in a comment next to it. MDK-998 tracks replacing it with a reusable mnemonic-bound vector once lightning-liquidity exposes a mint helper.