You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Expose pending HTLCs and dust exposure in ChannelDetails #1102
While working on ldk-server I ran into ldk-server#251, which tried to expose more channel data over its API but had to leave out pending HTLCs and dust exposure, because ldk-node's ChannelDetails doesn't include them.
Looking at ChannelDetails::from_ldk in src/types.rs, LDK's ChannelDetails already has these fields, but we don't copy them over:
pending_inbound_htlcs: Vec<InboundHTLCDetails>
pending_outbound_htlcs: Vec<OutboundHTLCDetails>
current_dust_exposure_msat: Option<u64>
next_splice_out_maximum_sat: u64
The HTLC details include the amount, CLTV expiry, payment hash, state and whether the HTLC is dust (plus skimmed_fee_msat for outbound ones).
I think these would be useful for:
debugging stuck payments, e.g. seeing which HTLCs are still pending on a channel and when
they expire
checking how close a channel is to its force-close deadline
comparing current_dust_exposure_msat against the channel's max_dust_htlc_exposure config
showing how much can be spliced out before calling splice_out
LND and CLN both show pending HTLCs when listing channels, so node operators are probably used to having this. tnull also mentioned in #163 that most ChannelDetails fields would make sense to expose, and #993 already reads pending_outbound_htlcs internally for LSPS5 notifications, so this data seems useful outside LDK too.
For the bindings, I guess the HTLC detail structs and the InboundHTLCStateDetails / OutboundHTLCStateDetails enums would need uniffi wrappers, similar to what we do for ChannelShutdownState in src/ffi/types.rs.
I left splice_details out on purpose since there's ongoing work on splice tracking (#1080, #1079, #1057) that already uses it internally, but it could be added later if that makes sense.
Does this sound reasonable? I'd be happy to work on it. @tnull@TheBlueMatt
Activity
tnull commentedon Sep 17, 2026
Yeah, makes sense, now done in #1103.
Expose pending HTLCs and channel dust exposure
Expose pending HTLCs and channel dust exposure