Skip to content

Conversation

@danielgranhao
Copy link
Collaborator

@danielgranhao danielgranhao commented Nov 25, 2025

This proposes an improvement over #440. It drops the reliance on the SSP in order to distinguish Lightning from HTLC payments.

Instead, we infer if a payment is Lightning if the transfer was sent to or received from the SSP. This only works while there is a single static SSP, and we'll need to find another solution when that stops being the case.

@roeierez
Copy link
Member

@danielgranhao what is the advantage of this method given the fact the user request is populated automatically by the SO?

@danielgranhao
Copy link
Collaborator Author

danielgranhao commented Nov 26, 2025

@danielgranhao what is the advantage of this method given the fact the user request is populated automatically by the SO?

Increased resiliency. If, for any reason, the SSP fails to provide the lightning user request, we end up with empty PaymentDetails instead of showing the incorrect Spark details with HTLC.

@danielgranhao danielgranhao force-pushed the daniel-improve-ln-vs-htlc-logic branch from 95aad87 to f5f9980 Compare November 26, 2025 10:50
@dangeross
Copy link
Collaborator

This also fixes an issue where the payment details for a Spark payment are none if there is no invoice or htlc details

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants