Also use cosntant backoff retry strategy as opposed to exponential
backoff. This is in case retrying several times quickly causes the
retry intervals to become large enough that the test is very slow
and/or the Bitcoin lock transaction expires.
The current problem occurs on the last message i.e. Bob sending
tx_redeem_encsig to Alice. The action is yielded for Bob to do it, but
Alice appears to never receive it (unconfirmed claim, requires more
logging).
Unfortunately, I had to put the wrap the swarm in Alice's `Network`
struct in an `Arc<Mutex<T>>` in order to be able to use `backoff` to
control the retry mechanism. This is because the stream of events
cannot be turned into a `SharedFuture` (unlike Bob's).
It would be good to find an alternative solution.
Alice does not respond with anything when receiving message 2 from Bob. We don't
want to leave Bob's request/response protocol waiting so send an empty response
back.
In order for Alice to complete the handshake she needs to transition to state 3,
for this she needs message 2 from Bob.
Send `bob::Message2` to Alice and transition to `State3` - completing the
handshake.
We model the getting of amounts as a network behaviour even though conceptually
it is a protocol. Refine/refactor the code a bit to make this more obvious.
- Use `Amounts` instead of `Messenger`
We only ever connect to a single peer, update peer tracker to reflect this. This
is a single patch because the handling of the two network behaviours is a
intertwined.
- Only track one peer connection
- Track the peer id and the multiaddr of the counterparty
- Emit an event for connection established on Alice's side as well as Bob's side
Add a binary crate `swap` that implements two nodes (Alice and Bob). With this
applied we can start up a node for each role and do:
- Bob: Requests current amounts using BTC is input
- Alice: Responds with amounts
- Bob: (mock) get user input to Ok the amounts
... continue with swap (TODO)
