Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
|
|
this simplifies usage when MiniWallet is used with a pre-mined chain.
|
|
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
./contrib/devtools/copyright_header.py update ./
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
Commits of previous years:
- 2021: f47dda2c58b5d8d623e0e7ff4e74bc352dfa83d7
- 2020: fa0074e2d82928016a43ca408717154a1c70a4db
- 2019: aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0
|
|
Review note: The changes are complete, because self.options.descriptors
is set to None in parse_args (test_framework.py).
A value of None implies -disablewallet, see the previous commit.
So if a call to add_wallet_options is missing, it will lead to a test
failure when the wallet is compiled in.
|
|
Our RBF policy is different from the rules specified in BIP125. For
example, the BIP does not mention Rule 6, and our Rule 4 uses the
(configurable) incremental relay feerate (distinct from the
minimum relay feerate). Those interested in our policy should refer to
doc/policy/mempool-replacements.md instead. These rules may also
continue to diverge with package RBF and other RBF improvements. Keep
references to the BIP125 signaling wrt sequence numbers, since that is
still correct and widely used. It is helpful to refer to this as "BIP125
signaling" since it is unambiguous and succint, especially if we have
multiple ways to signal replaceability in the future.
The rule numbers in doc/policy/mempool-replacements.md correspond
largely to those of BIP 125, so we can still refer to them like "Rule 5."
|
|
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
sed -i 's:BIP125_SEQUENCE_NUMBER:MAX_BIP125_RBF_SEQUENCE:g' $(git grep -l BIP125_SEQUENCE_NUMBER ./test)
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
|
|
|
|
4c9666bd73645b94ae81be1faf7a0b8237dd6e99 Mention `mempoolfullrbf` in policy/mempool-replacements.md (Antoine Riard)
aae66ab43d794bdfaa2dade91760cc55861c9693 Update getmempoolinfo RPC with `mempoolfullrbf` (Antoine Riard)
3e27e317270fdc2dd02794fea9da016387699636 Introduce `mempoolfullrbf` node setting. (Antoine Riard)
Pull request description:
This is ready for review.
Recent discussions among LN devs have brought back on the surface concerns about the security of multi-party funded transactions against pinnings attacks and other mempool-based nuisances. The lack of full-rbf transaction-relay topology connected to miners open the way to cheap and naive DoS against multi-party funded transactions (e.g coinjoins, dual-funded channels, on-chain DLCs, ...) without solutions introducing an overhead cost or centralization vectors afaik . For more details, see [0].
This PR implements a simple `fullrbf` setting, where the node always allows transaction replacement, ignoring BIP125 opt-in flag. The default value of the setting stays **false**, therefore opt-in replacement is still the default Bitcoin Core replacement policy. Contrary to a previous proposal of mine and listening to feedbacks collected since then [1], I think this new setting simply offers more flexibility in a node transaction-relay policy suiting one's application requirements, without arguing a change of the default behavior.
I [posted](https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-June/020557.html) on the ML to invite operators with a bitcoin application sensitive to full-rbf (e.g dual-funded LN channels service providers) or mempool researchers to join a bootstrapped full-rbf activated peers network for experimentation and learning. If people have strong opinions against the existence of such full-rbf transaction-relay network, I'm proposing to express them on the future thread.
[0] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2021-May/003033.html
[1] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-June/019074.html
Follow-up suggestions :
- soft-enable opt-in RBF in the wallet : https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25353#issuecomment-1154918789
- p2p discovery and additional outbound connection to full-rbf peers : https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25353#issuecomment-1156044401
- match the code between RPC, wallet and mempool about disregard of inherited signaling : #22698
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
reACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25353/commits/4c9666bd73645b94ae81be1faf7a0b8237dd6e99
glozow:
ACK 4c9666bd73645b94ae81be1faf7a0b8237dd6e99, a few nits which are non-blocking.
w0xlt:
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25353/commits/4c9666bd73645b94ae81be1faf7a0b8237dd6e99
Tree-SHA512: 9e288bf22e06a9808804e58178444ef1830c3fdd42fd8a7cd7ffb101f8f586e08b000679be407d63ca76a56f7216227b368ff630c81f3fac3243db1a1202ab1c
|
|
This new node policy setting enables to accept replaced-by-fee
transaction without inspection of the replaceability signaling
as described in BIP125 "explicit signaling".
If turns on, the node mempool accepts transaction replacement
as described in `policy/mempool-replacements.md`.
The default setting value is `false`, implying opt-in RBF
is enforced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fafee78188c3de5f6245ec769429822ca4b98c63 rpc: Return incrementalrelayfee in getmempoolinfo (MacroFake)
Pull request description:
Seems odd to return other policy info, but not the incremental relay fee
ACKs for top commit:
1440000bytes:
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25439/commits/fafee78188c3de5f6245ec769429822ca4b98c63
w0xlt:
Code Review ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25439/commits/fafee78188c3de5f6245ec769429822ca4b98c63
jarolrod:
tACK fafee78188c3de5f6245ec769429822ca4b98c63
Tree-SHA512: faad0af6c039b8257acbeac913bc5dcdb2ea2db304c95e52601536c8de60eb1186e9fbb4a64a68adf476605f18022aeda16a5644a0d7912592b0977e4c029638
|
|
|
|
The from_node argument is no longer used as of commit
a55606c3bdbfdf660b093bc2a618d537ffae7f26
|
|
|
|
This testcase exercises rule 5 of BIP-125 (no more than 100 evictions
due to replacement) without having to test under non-default mempool
parametmers.
|
|
If no `from_node` parameter is passed explicitely to the
`create_self_transfer` method, the test node passed in the course
of creating the MiniWallet instance is used. This seems to
be the main use-case in most of the current functional
tests, i.e. in many instances the calls can be shortened.
|
|
|
|
The test currently leads to a failure if in general wallet
support is compiled, but the library for the specified type
(BDB/SQLite) is not, i.e. if started with the
`--legacy-wallet` parameter, but bitcoind is compiled
without BDB support.
Fix this by checking if the specified wallet type (BDB for
legacy wallet, SQLite for descriptor wallet) is available.
Also move the helper `is_specified_wallet_compiled()` to the
test framework's class BitcoinTestFramework first, so it can
be reused.
|
|
changes
fac23c211407a77af82bb1491c48c8d37022c8b3 scripted-diff: Bump copyright headers (MarcoFalke)
fa974f1f1417a536636347072e86bcb54a4c909c scripted-diff: Remove redundant sync_all and sync_blocks (MarcoFalke)
fad13991aea6463ecf07dd907de1c1b23837d7e7 test: Properly set sync_fun in NodeNetworkLimitedTest (MarcoFalke)
faeff577093c4de9eec9491486a2c3766d46dae6 test: Use 4 spaces for indentation (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Some cleanups after commit 94db963de501e4aba6e5d8150a01ceb85753dee1
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK fac23c211407a77af82bb1491c48c8d37022c8b3
Tree-SHA512: 5acfd5bb9679b41969d0fc6fc85801ccadcd6530ea692bac6352668e06fc7a9b0e1db3fd6fba435e84afe983d2eb07bd0a47c8364462bb7110004bd3d102b698
|
|
The previous diff touched most files in ./test/, so bump the headers to
avoid having to touch them again for a bump later.
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
./contrib/devtools/copyright_header.py update ./test/
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With this new method, outputs to an arbitrary scriptPubKey/amount can
be created. Note that the implementation was already present in the
test feature_rbf.py and is just moved to the MiniWallet interface, in
order to enable other tests to also use it.
|
|
feature_rbf.py
f680d27155374de658d40db0ba40460919aa1ba2 test: use MiniWallet for make_utxo helper in feature_rbf.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
0f275246027266fa256d0a09251bb2c88d9bd72f test: scale amounts in test_doublespend_tree down by factor 10 (Sebastian Falbesoner)
d1e2481274edf2ac14747be633d86ecd46814ef4 test: scale amounts in test_doublespend_chain down by factor 10 (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR aims to further increase MiniWallet usage in the functional test feature_rbf.py by using it in the `make_utxo(...)` helper, which is the only part that needs a wallet for most sub-tests. In order to do that, the amounts for the utxos have to be scaled down in two sub-tests first (`test_doublespend_chain` and `test_doublespend_tree`, see first two commits), since we need amounts passed to `make_utxo` than can be funded by only one input. For creating UTXOs with a value of 50 BTC, we'd need to implement a method for consolidating multiple utxos into one first, which seems to be overkill.
Note that after this PR's change, there is only one sub-test left (`test_rpc`) that needs the wallet compiled into bitcoind.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK f680d27155374de658d40db0ba40460919aa1ba2 🦐
Tree-SHA512: 46c8c245086a9e79855c4ede2f8f412333cf2658136805196b203b3567c89398d77fcb80715c0bb72fdc84331cc67544b2fdc259193a3adcb2fc36e147c26fce
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is done in order to prepare the make_utxo helper to use MiniWallet,
which only supports creating transactions with single inputs, i.e. we
need to create amounts small enough to be funded by coinbase transactions
(50 BTC).
|
|
This is done in order to prepare the make_utxo helper to use MiniWallet,
which only supports creating transactions with single inputs, i.e. we
need to create amounts small enough to be funded by coinbase transactions
(50 BTC).
|
|
|
|
The changes in feature_rbf can be reviewed with
--color-moved=dimmed-zebra --color-moved-ws=ignore-all-space
|
|
|
|
also document on why we start scanning blocks at height 76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can be reviewed with --ignore-all-space
|
|
|
|
This is already done by the test framework in setup_nodes()
|
|
in RBF policy
2eb0eeda39cab997f9a5f817f7c12e7fffeaf35a validation: document lack of inherited signaling in RBF policy (Antoine Riard)
906b6d9da6a6b2e6a5f1d9046b3b9c2c7e490c99 test: Extend feature_rbf.py with no inherited signaling (Antoine Riard)
Pull request description:
Contrary to BIP125 or other full-node implementation (e.g btcd), Bitcoin Core's mempool policy doesn't implement inherited signaling.
This PR documents our mempool behavior on this and add a test demonstrating the case.
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK 2eb0eeda39cab997f9a5f817f7c12e7fffeaf35a
benthecarman:
ACK 2eb0eeda39cab997f9a5f817f7c12e7fffeaf35a
Tree-SHA512: d41453d3b49bae3c1eb532a968f43bc047084913bd285929d4d9cba142777ff2be38163d912e28dfc635f4ecf446de68effad799c6e71be52f81e83410c712fb
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) add a new sane "address" field (for outputs that have an
identifiable address, which doesn't include bare multisig)
2) with -deprecatedrpc: leave "reqSigs" and "addresses" intact
(with all weird/wrong behavior they have now)
3) without -deprecatedrpc: drop "reqSigs" and "addresses" entirely,
always.
|
|
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
./contrib/devtools/copyright_header.py update ./
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
|
|
substitutes "for x in range(N):" by "for _ in range(N):"
indicates to the reader that a block is just repeated N times, and
that the loop counter is not used in the body
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addresses #17043, affects RBF and BIP68 functional tests.
The "tx-size-small" policy rule rejects transactions with a non-witness size of
smaller than 82 bytes (see src/validation.cpp:MemPoolAccept::PreChecks(...)),
which corresponds to a transaction with 1 segwit input and 1 P2WPKH output.
Through the default address change, the created test transactions have segwit
inputs now and sending to short scriptPubKeys might violate this rule. By
bumping the dummy scriptPubKey size to 22 bytes (= the size of a P2WPKH
scriptPubKey), on all occurences the problem is solved.
The dummy scriptPubKey has the format:
21 <21-byte-long string of 'a' or 1s>
former commit messages, now squashed:
test: rbf, bip68: use constant DUMMY_P2WPKH_SCRIPT for bumped scriptPubKey
test: rbf, bip68: use constant DUMMY_P2WPKH_SCRIPT for dummy scriptPubKeys (b'a' * 35)
test: rbf, bip68: comment DUMMY_P2WPKH_SCRIPT constant, put into common (new) module
|
|
|