Quote from: franky1 on Today at 10:28:44 PM

your again ignoring the hundreds of different message types. just to circle back to your favourite message of the commitment HTLC update.

Hundreds of different message types? I am all ears to you. When I asked you what kind of message is used in your example, you kept ignoring me or saying "hop_data", which we already know that it is wrong.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 10:28:44 PM

you really are becoming very very obvious. even when i point out your narrow minded scenario of only wanting to talk about commitments. you still repeat it.
[...]
you need to learn about the whole network gossip stuff and routing. and not just only want to concentrate on the channel partner commitments after negotiations

I am really sorry that the Lightning Network is designed this way! There is no other standardised message other than "update_add_htlc" which includes routing instructions. Prove me wrong.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 10:28:44 PM

again. the commitment HTLC is measured in sats.
a commitment HTLC 'packet' is not msat.

It doesn't matter.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 10:28:44 PM

again ignoring the other HTLC stuff in micropayments (ln payment) messages

I believe that the following message is a valid Lightning (HTLC) message as per bolt01.

Quote from: Rath_ on Today at 10:08:26 PM

Code:

Type: 128 (update_add_htlc)
Payload:
○ 32: channel_id
○ 8: id
○ 8: amount_msat
○ 32: payment_hash
○ 4: cltv_expiry
○ 1366: onion_routing_packet

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 10:28:44 PM

done so people can have no harm, no lost value indicators of possible future things. like when routing. you cant commit to an amount before your sure of the amount that needs to be committed

That's actually a good example. However, you don't know if nodes along the path have enough liquidity unless you try to send the payment through them. Otherwise, it would be possible to probe any channel at any time without having to lock up a large amount of coins in a channel.

I posted my node debug log some time ago. My node failed to forward an incoming HTLC due to no liquidity. You can see messages like: "update_add_htlc", "commitment_signed", "update_fail_htlc".

Code:

03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: peer_in WIRE_UPDATE_ADD_HTLC
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: NEW:: HTLC REMOTE 408 = RCVD_ADD_HTLC/SENT_ADD_HTLC
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: htlc added LOCAL: local 3828178009 remote 1171821991
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: -> local 3828178009 remote 1074154247

03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: Creating commit_sig signature [REDACTED] for tx [REDACTED] wscript [REDACTED]
hsmd: Client: Received message 20 from client
3562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: Creating HTLC signature [REDACTED] for tx [REDACTED] wscript [REDACTED]
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-chan#85: HTLC in 403 SENT_ADD_REVOCATION->SENT_ADD_ACK_COMMIT
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: Sending commit_sig with 1 htlc sigs
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: peer_out WIRE_COMMITMENT_SIGNED

037659a0ac8eb3b8d0a720114efc861d3a940382dcfa1403746b4f8f6b2e8810ba-channeld-chan#29: Failed to add 1 remove 0 htlcs
037659a0ac8eb3b8d0a720114efc861d3a940382dcfa1403746b4f8f6b2e8810ba-channeld-chan#29: Adding HTLC 1126 amount=97653097msat cltv=716528 gave CHANNEL_ERR_CHANNEL_CAPACITY_EXCEEDED
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: FAIL:: HTLC REMOTE 408 = SENT_REMOVE_HTLC/RCVD_REMOVE_HTLC
03562bdcf00fe0cf44e8a491a8c9b26f31c4e45c9a88cdfd6a2f0f2550a304c73e-channeld-chan#85: peer_out WIRE_UPDATE_FAIL_HTLC