Skip to content

fix: send a fixed fee limit on Transactions.send [AMB-2979] - #37

Merged
bufo24 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
jesseva/amb-2979-update-fee-limit-in-sdk-for-sending
Aug 17, 2026
Merged

fix: send a fixed fee limit on Transactions.send [AMB-2979]#37
bufo24 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
jesseva/amb-2979-update-fee-limit-in-sdk-for-sending

Conversation

@bufo24

@bufo24 bufo24 commented Aug 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

  • fee_limit_sat was dropped entirely from LND/litd send requests in fix!: remove fee limit from Transactions.send #33. Reintroduces it as a fixed 4294967296 sats (~42.9 BTC — effectively unlimited) sent on every Transactions.send() call, rather than restoring it as a caller-configurable param.
  • This keeps the node from applying its own default fee-limit behavior while keeping the SDK's public API surface unchanged (no new/returned param on SendParams).

Test plan

  • pnpm build
  • pnpm typecheck (+ typecheck:examples for the .cts example)
  • pnpm test — added an assertion in transactions.send.test.ts that the outgoing node request body carries fee_limit_sat: '4294967296'
  • pnpm format:check

@bufo24
bufo24 force-pushed the jesseva/amb-2979-update-fee-limit-in-sdk-for-sending branch 2 times, most recently from d0c7e7c to aa9df6d Compare August 17, 2026 13:06
@bufo24
bufo24 marked this pull request as ready for review August 17, 2026 13:06
@bufo24 bufo24 changed the title feat: send a fixed fee limit on Transactions.send [AMB-2979] fix: send a fixed fee limit on Transactions.send [AMB-2979] Aug 17, 2026
fee_limit_sat was dropped entirely from node payment requests in #33,
which risks the node applying its own restrictive default. Send a fixed
4294967296 sats (effectively unlimited) on every send instead of
exposing fee-limit configuration to callers again.
@bufo24
bufo24 force-pushed the jesseva/amb-2979-update-fee-limit-in-sdk-for-sending branch from aa9df6d to 565aeb0 Compare August 17, 2026 13:10
@bufo24
bufo24 merged commit 98bf969 into main Aug 17, 2026
2 checks passed
@apotdevin apotdevin mentioned this pull request Aug 17, 2026
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.

2 participants