Jump to content

Ripple send error


Galal
 Share

Recommended Posts

What tool are you using to form the transaction? The tecPATH_DRY error means that none of the paths specified in the transaction (or the default path if no paths were specified and the default path wasn't disabled by the transaction flags) could not move any funds. This can occur if the transaction is generated improperly or it can occur if you don't hold any asset that anyone is willing to trade for any asset the recipient accepts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
On 1/12/2017 at 1:46 PM, JoelKatz said:

r it can occur if you don't hold any asset that anyone is willing to trade for any asset the recipient accepts.

Am I understanding this correctly?  Scenario: Gatehub (me with XRP) wanting to send x amount of BTC to Coinbase. Gatehub offers best solution based on my holdings (only XRP), asks me to proceed, I confirm, it sends. Because Coinbase does not accept XRP, thereby becoming the "unwilling to trade" vendor, the tecPATH_DRY result?  Secondary question: do recipient addresses create parameters (published parameters) on partial units of assets sent? e.g. 1/100 or 1/10000, etc.?

I've run up against PATH_DRY and PATH_Partial for the first time. I need to get smarter on transfer protocols. Thnx for any details you can point me to or that I can learn from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It shouldn't happen that way because the pathfinding logic should only offer you a path if it thinks that path will work. It's always possible for something to change after pathfinding finished and before your transaction got submitted. But that should be rare.

The original intent was to return tecPATH_DRY only if the paths could move no funds at all and to return tecPATH_PARTIAL if the paths could move some funds but not enough to complete the payment. This would have made troubleshooting a bit easier as you would immediately know whether your paths were invalid/bad/broken or just not liquid enough. But, unfortunately, that distinction got lost with some code changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.