Awesome

What is it

This proposes a new type of channel which has no on-chain funding but otherwise works according to LN rules. Notable features are the following:

• It defines two distinct roles: Client and Host. Client code is to be implemented in end-user LN wallets and Host is a service which is to be provided by willing businesses. Once implemented, any business who wishes to be a Host will be able to use this unified protocol instead of building their own ad-hoc hosted wallets from scratch.

• Funds in hosted channel is a pure Host's IOU to Client which is not automatically enforcable on-chain but is still auditable. Whereas normal channel provides enforcability by a means of cross-signed commitment transaction a hosted channel provides auditability by a notion of latest cross-signed state which can be used to prove Host's obligations.

• It provides privacy guarantees identical to normal channels: Host does not know who the Client is and has no metadata on Client's payments because route selection, onion formation as well as preimage generation for incoming payments still happen on Client side.

• The main motivation for this is radically simplified UX and zero on-chain footprint: hosted channels can be created on the fly with zero on-chain fund allocation on either Host or Client side. As such, hosted channels should be seen as an auditable and privacy preserving improvement over current hosted LN wallets; they may exist along with normal channels in otherwise autonomous LN wallets and function as an easy on-ramp to LN for new users.

Specifics

• Hosted channel is always private and can never be closed in normal channel sense, its data may only be removed from Client wallet if there is no desire to use it anymore. Once removed, it can always be fully restored later provided that Client still has a wallet seed.

• Since hosted channels have no on-chain basis their shortChannelIds can not be derived from blockchain, as such they must be random and follow procedure defined in #681.

• Hosted channel ID is deterministic and is always known in advance for every Client/Host pair, it is derived as sha256(bip69_lexicographical_order(Client node ID, Host node ID)). This implies that each Client/Host pair may only have one hosted channel between them.

• A notion of blockday is introduced as current blockchain height / 144 to be used in messages specific to hosted channels, the intention is to ground them in real blockchain timeline.

Invoking

• Hosted channel must be explicitly invoked by Client on reconnection which is different from normal channel reestablish procedure, the rationale is that Client may have normal channels with Host and may not wish to use a hosted one. Once invoked, Host should reply with either init_hosted_channel message if no channel exists yet or with last_cross_signed_state if it does.

    +-------+                                           +-------+
    |       |--(1)------ invoke_hosted_channel -------->|       |
    |       |<-(2)------ init_hosted_channel -----------|       |
    |       |--(3)------ state_update ----------------->|       |
    |       |<-(4)------ state_update ------------------|       | // new channel established
    |       |                  or                       |       |
    |   A   |<-(2)------ last_cross_signed_state -------|   B   |
    |       |--(3)------ last_cross_signed_state ------>|       | // existing channel invoked
    +-------+                                           +-------+
  
    - where node A is Client and node B is Host
  

The invoke_hosted_channel Message

1. type: 65535 (invoke_hosted_channel)
2. data:

• [chain_hash:chain_hash]
• [u16:len]
• [len*byte:refund_scriptpubkey]
• [u16:len]
• [len*byte:secret]

Rationale

• By sending this message Client prompts Host to reveal last cross signed channel state or offer a new hosted channel if none exists for a given Client yet.

• refund_scriptpubkey is similar to scriptpubkey in 02-peer-protocol#closing-initiation-shutdown and must be provided by Client for a case when Host would want to stop a hosted channel and refund the rest of the balance while Client is offline.

• secret is an optional data which can be used by Host to tweak channel parameters (non-zero initial Client balance, larger capacity, only allow Clients with secrets etc).

The init_hosted_channel Message

1. type: 65533 (init_hosted_channel)
2. data:

• [u64:max_htlc_value_in_flight_msat]
• [u64:htlc_minimum_msat]
• [u16:max_accepted_htlcs]
• [u64:channel_capacity_msat]
• [u16:liability_deadline_blockdays]
• [u64:minimal_onchain_refund_amount_satoshis]
• [u64:initial_client_balance_msat]
• [u16:len]
• [len*byte:features]

Rationale

• This message is sent by Host in reply to invoke_hosted_channel if no hosted channel exists for a given Client yet.

• liability_deadline_blockdays specifies a period in blockdays after last state_update exchange during which the Host is definitely going to maintain a channel. That is, if there are no payments during liability_deadline_blockdays period then Host owes nothing to Client anymore. For example: if last exchanged state_update had blockday set to 1000 and liability_deadline_blockdays is set to 2000, then Host may not maintain a channel after blockday 3000 if it was not used all this time.

• minimal_onchain_refund_amount_satoshis specifies a minimal balance that Client must have in a hosted channel for a Host to consider refunding it on-chain using Client's refund_scriptpubkey.

• features here work similarly to node features field in Init message. While establishing a new hosted channel a node must drop it if unknown even features are present.

The last_cross_signed_state Message

1. type: 65531 (last_cross_signed_state)
2. data:

• [u16:len]
• [len*byte:last_refund_scriptpubkey]
• [init_hosted_channel:init_hosted_channel]
• [u32:block_day]
• [u64:local_balance_msat]
• [u64:remote_balance_msat]
• [u32:local_updates]
• [u32:remote_updates]
• [u16:num_incoming_htlcs]
• [num_incoming_htlcs*update_add_htlc:incoming_htlcs]
• [u16:num_outgoing_htlcs]
• [num_outgoing_htlcs*update_add_htlc:outgoing_htlcs]
• [signature:remote_sig_of_local]
• [signature:local_sig_of_remote]

Rationale

• This message is sent by Host in reply to invoke_hosted_channel if it already exists for a given Client, once sent Host expects a similar last_cross_signed_state message from Client.

• Both parties must make sure that remote_sig_of_local and local_sig_of_remote signatures are valid, and that inverted local_updates/remote_updates numbers from remote last_cross_signed_state are the same as local_updates/remote_updates from local last_cross_signed_state.

• If local signature of remote last_cross_signed_state is valid but inverted local_updates/remote_updates numbers from remote last_cross_signed_state are higher than local_updates/remote_updates from local last_cross_signed_state then this means that local peer has fallen behind (or completely lost a state). Once this happens local peer must act as follows:

  • First, it must check if remote last_cross_signed_state points to one of future channel states which can be re-created locally. To enable this both peers store each local and remote update_add_htlc, update_fulfill_htlc, update_fail_htlc, update_fail_malformed_htlc message they send or receive in historic order until new last_cross_signed_state is reached. This vector of updates must be traversed with respected local last_cross_signed_state message created on each step and then compared against remote last_cross_signed_state update numbers. Once a match is found local peer applies it as current state, resolves all updates preceding this state and re-transmits all local updates following this state.
  • Second, if no matching future local last_cross_signed_state could be found then this means that local peer has completely lost it, in this case local peer should invert a remote last_cross_signed_state and apply it as its current state, then resolve all incoming HTLCs contained in remote last_cross_signed_state.

• Local state signature is obtained by creating a sigHash from localy generated last_cross_signed_state: sha256(refund_scriptpubkey + liability_deadline_blockdays + minimal_onchain_refund_amount_satoshis + channel_capacity_msat + initial_client_balance_msat + block_day + local_balance_msat + remote_balance_msat + local_updates + remote_updates + incoming_htlcs + outgoing_htlcs) and then signing it with nodeId private key.

Normal operation

• First a peer sends update_add_htlc/update_fulfill_htlc/update_fail_htlc/update_fail_malformed_htlc messages which are then followed by local state_update message, which is then followed by remote state_update. Once both valid state_updates are collected a new cross-signed state is reached which in turn allows peers to resolve previous updates.

    +-------+                                            +-------+
    |       |----------- update_add_htlc #1 ------------>|       |
    |       |----------- state_update (is_terminal=0) -->|       | // A: here's my state update, now you have a new cross-signed state
    |       |<---------- state_update (is_terminal=1) ---|       | // B: got your update, anything else incoming?
    |       |----------- state_update (is_terminal=1) -->|       | // A: no other updates for now
    |       |<---------- state_update (is_terminal=1) ---|       | // B: OK, resolving
    |   A   |<---------- update_fulfill_htlc #1 ---------|   B   | 
    |       |<---------- state_update (is_terminal=0) ---|       |
    |       |----------- state_update (is_terminal=1) -->|       |
    |       |<---------- state_update (is_terminal=1) ---|       |
    |       |----------- state_update (is_terminal=1) -->|       |
    +-------+                                            +-------+
  
    Where B is Host and A is Client
    
    A more involved case with entwined updates, a diagram takes into account that it takes time for messages to get through, but message order is always preserved
  
    +-------+                                                   +-------+
    | 1, 0  |----------> update_add_htlc #A1                    | 0, 0  |
    | 1, 0  |----------> state_update #A1 (is_terminal=0)       | 0, 0  | // A inverts local state and signs B's `0, 1`, by not making it terminal A instructs B to not resolve an HTLC even if signature is correct but send an acking `state_update` in return
    | 1, 0  |            update_add_htlc #B1 <------------------| 1, 0  |
    | 1, 0  |            state_update #B1 (is_terminal=0) <-----| 1, 0  | // B inverts local state and signs A's `0, 1`, by not making it terminal B instructs A to not resolve an HTLC even if signature is correct but send an acking `state_update` in return
    | 1, 0  |                                                   | 1, 0  |
    | 1, 0  |            update_add_htlc #A1 ------------------>| 1, 1  |
    | 1, 0  |            state_update #A1 (is_terminal=0) ----->| 1, 1  | // A's `state_update` signs B's `1, 0` state, but B has `1, 1` by the time it arrives
    | 1, 1  |<---------- update_add_htlc #B1                    | 1, 1  |
    | 1, 1  |<---------- state_update #B1 (is_terminal=0)       | 1, 1  | // B's `state_update` signs A's `1, 0` state, but A has `1, 1` by the time it arrives
    | 1, 1  |            state_update #B2 (is_terminal=1) <-----| 1, 1  | // B replies with a new `state_update` which signs `1, 1` this time
    | 1, 1  |----------> state_update #A2 (is_terminal=1)       | 1, 1  | // A replies with a new `state_update` which signs `1, 1` this time
    | 1, 1  |<---------- state_update #B2 (is_terminal=1)       | 1, 1  | // A gets a new `state_update` which correctly signs `1, 1` and is terminal, B starts resolving A's HTLC
    | 1, 1  |            state_update #A2 (is_terminal=1) ----->| 1, 1  | // B gets a new `state_update` which correctly signs `1, 1` and is terminal, A starts resolving B's HTLC
    |       |                                                   |       |
    |   A   |                                                   |   B   |
    |       |                                                   |       |
    +-------+                                                   +-------+
  
    Where B is Host and A is Client
    
  

The state_update Message

1. type: 65529 (state_update)
2. data:

• [u32:block_day]
• [u32:local_updates]
• [u32:remote_updates]
• [signature:local_sig_of_remote]
• [boolean:is_terminal]

Rationale

• Local state_update contains a local signature of remote view of next last_cross_signed_state. Signature is constructed as follows: generate a next local last_cross_signed_state with empty signature fields, then invert it (i.e. make a copy with local_balance_msat = remote_balance_msat, local_updates = remote_updates and so on), then sign its signature hash.

• In normal channels each peer keeps track of local_next_htlc_id/remote_next_htlc_id counters which are increased by incoming and outgoing update_add_htlc only, in hosted channels each peer keeps track of local_updates/remote_updates counters which are updated by every incoming and outgoing update message (update_add_htlc, update_fulfill_htlc, update_fail_htlc, update_fail_malformed_htlc).

• While verifying a signature a drift of 1 blockday is permitted i.e. abs(local block_day - remote block_day) <= 1.

• is_terminal is a flag which must always be set to 0 after sending local update_add_htlc/update_fulfill_htlc/update_fail_htlc/update_fail_malformed_htlc messages and always be set to 1 when replying to remote state_update. By using this convention peers can determine if remote peer is sending more updates or this is it for now and resolving should be started.

Failure and state overriding

Normal channel operation may be interrupted in a number of ways (incorrect state update numbers, signature, timed out outgoing HTLC etc). Once this happens a peer must put a channel in SUSPENDED state and send out an Error message. Hosted channel use tagged errors with first two bytes of Error message reserved for the following cases:

0001: Wrong blockday in a remote message.
0002: Wrong local signature from remote message.
0003: Wrong remote signature from remote message.
0005: Too many state_update messages without reaching of new local last_cross_signed_state (more than 16 in a row).
0006: Timed out outgoing HTLC.
0007: Remote peer has lost all upstream channels and can't resolve in-flight routed HTLCs.
0008: Hosted channel denied by Host when Client was trying to invoke it.

Normal operation may be resumed after channel gets SUSPENDED by Host sending a state_override message to Client which would erase all previous problematic state and set a new agreed upon balance breakdown. Client must manually accept this message which would send a state_update in return. Client's wallet UI/UX must be especially explicit about what is going on in this situation.

    +-------+                                           +-------+
    |       |<---------- state_override ----------------|       | // A has new local `last_cross_signed_state`
    |   A   |----------- state_update ----------------->|   B   | // B has new local `last_cross_signed_state`
    +-------+                                           +-------+

    Where B is Host and A is Client

The state_override Message

1. type: 65527 (state_override)
2. data:

• [u32:block_day]
• [u64:local_balance_msat]
• [u32:local_updates]
• [u32:remote_updates]
• [signature:local_sig_of_remote]

Data format for channel state snapshot

When resolving disputes after a channel got SUSPENDED it may be necessary for a Client to manually provide a channel state snapshot which contains last cross signed state along with subsequent updates from both peers, those may include update_fulfill_htlc messages with preimages which can be used by Host to manually fulfill outstanding HTLCs. Otherwise channel snapshot must not contain any other types of secrets.

The hosted_state Message

1. data:

• [channel_id:channel_id]
• [u16:num_next_local_updates]
• [num_next_local_updates*[update_add_htlc/update_fulfill_htlc/update_fail_htlc/update_fail_malformed_htlc]:next_local_updates]
• [u16:num_next_remote_updates]
• [num_next_remote_updates*[update_add_htlc/update_fulfill_htlc/update_fail_htlc/update_fail_malformed_htlc]:next_remote_updates]
• [last_cross_signed_state:last_cross_signed_state]

Resolving edge cases

Peer misses a channel or falls behind

This situation is to be resolved in a standard way described in last_cross_signed_state Rationale.

Receiver stops responding while incoming payment is in-flight

Issue: malicious or offline peer may accept update_add_htlc and a following state_update without ever replying. In this situation sender has a limited time to either fulfill a payment downstream (which would require obtaining a preimage from non-responding peer) or fail it, otherwise sender risks downstream channel getting remotely force-closed.

Solution: similar to how this is handled in normal channels, right before CLTV timelock is about to expire a sender must put a hosted channel into SUSPENDED mode and fail a payment upstream. Hosted channel can be put back to operational mode at a later time by exchaning state_override messages where receiver balance is adjusted such that failed in-flight HTLC is removed.

Sender stops responding on obtaining a preimage

Issue: on receiving update_fulfill_htlc sender may use a preimage to fulfill a payment upstream and stop responding to receiver. Sender would thus get the funds into its upstream channel while receiver won't have an updated last_cross_signed_state with payment resolved.

Solution: the goal here is not to enforce payment receiving since this is impossible for hosted channels but to cryptographically prove that malicious behaviour has taken place on sender side. This is achieved in a following way:

1. When sender transmits update_add_htlc to receiver and expects update_fulfill_htlc in return this can only mean that sender already has a committed in-flight payment upstream which can be unconditionally resolved once sender knows a preimage.

2. After receiving update_add_htlc followed by state_update receiver has a new last_cross_signed_state where sender has signed an obligation to provide X funds to receiver if receiver reveals a preimage within next Y blocks (a CLTV expiry delta).

3. When having this data along with preimage revealed (update_fulfill_htlc sent) a sender software must notify an owner if payment is not getting resolved within a reasonable time frame, but well before CLTV deadline (otherwise sender could claim receiver just was not cooperating so sender had to fail a payment on CLTV expiry). Sender is then expected to take action which can range from contacing receiver support to revealing a last_cross_signed_state along with preimage publically, thus giving sender no chance of denying that active in-flight HTLC exists and respected preimage is revealed. Note that for this to work a final CLTV window set by receiver software should be large enough, at least 285 blocks is recommended.

Host decides to refund a channel on-chain using Client's refund_scriptpubkey

Issue: After doing that Client may show up with last last_cross_signed_state claiming that funds are still in a hosted channel.

Solution: Host must wait at least 1 blockday until broadcasting an on-chain refunding transaction, in that case it will be included in a block whose blockday is higher than the one contained in Client's last_cross_signed_state. This will prove that refund has happened after any last known channel activity. After refunding this way hosted channel data may be safelly removed from Host database.