-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 404
Allow to set manual node penalties #1592
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ugh, I need to stop reviewing pre-coffee, sorry, this should probably look up the source, not the target. I believe both are correct, but in general the routing happens destination -> sender so if we check the source when getting the channel penalty we'll penalize the path earlier in the routing process. Its a pretty minor difference, but still.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see your point that a penalty for the source would be considered a bit earlier. However, I chose the target here since it generally seems more in line with the behavior I would expect, and in particular it allows us to penalize/prefer specific single-hop paths. This could come handy when a user would like to use this mechanism to always choose a particular channel when routing to a neighbor node.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wait, can it? If you're paying a given peer, this API doesn't let you pick a channel to that peer, you can punish that peer, but I'm not sure what that does?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well I assume when you have multiple channels open to different peers you can set a low/high penalty to prefer/avoid a specific one over the others for example? I'd think this could even get used for simple balancing purposes, i.e., set higher penalties the more a channel is imbalanced. A nice side-effect in this case would be that you could always still fall back on a penalized peer, as long as you not set the penalty outright to
u64::max_value()
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, but I don't see how this accomplishes what you're saying - the penalties here are on nodes, not channels, so you can't balance between different channels you have with the same peer. As for across peers, we'll basically always take the direct path.
Are you suggesting users could use this to penalize the direct path enough that we'd prefer to take an indirect one? I suppose you'd be right there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, this gives us the possibility to essentially prioritize first hops. I agree that a more fine-grained prioritization on a per-channel basis could be an improvement, but I think this can be a good first step.