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
For lnurlp and Lightning Address, we currently add a memo containing the optional payer-created "comment", so that the payee can read the comment in their transaction history. However, as per LNURL specs, the description actually has to contain a different string that is already announced before a payer can add their comment.
With the v1 endpoint addinvoice, you can add the memo property, and only a hash of the actual description (which is fine, since the wallet can display the description from the lnurlp discovery endpoint it queried beforehand). However, with the v2 endpoint /invoices, it seems that you can only give it the actual description property, but not a memo.
Basically, the question is if it's possible with the v2 endpoint to store a normal comment as the memo, while also implementing LUD-06 correctly, i.e. the description hash is a hash of a metadata array, not just a comment/text.
Maybe I'm understanding something wrong here, in which case you can just treat this issue as an informational/support/docs one.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
re v2 endpoint. I think it is just a different naming. the description is the memo
there is description/memo and the description_hash and the BOLT11 spec is actually pretty strange about this. and the hash should be used if the description is longer than x chars.
I think LND now allows setting both description and description_hash. but for the spec it's actually more correct to only set the description_hash.
but there is also a push to drop the description_hash in the LNURL spec: lnurl/luds#234
For lnurlp and Lightning Address, we currently add a memo containing the optional payer-created "comment", so that the payee can read the comment in their transaction history. However, as per LNURL specs, the description actually has to contain a different string that is already announced before a payer can add their comment.
With the v1 endpoint
addinvoice
, you can add thememo
property, and only a hash of the actual description (which is fine, since the wallet can display the description from the lnurlp discovery endpoint it queried beforehand). However, with the v2 endpoint/invoices
, it seems that you can only give it the actualdescription
property, but not amemo
.Basically, the question is if it's possible with the v2 endpoint to store a normal comment as the memo, while also implementing LUD-06 correctly, i.e. the description hash is a hash of a metadata array, not just a comment/text.
Maybe I'm understanding something wrong here, in which case you can just treat this issue as an informational/support/docs one.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: