<p>I'm trying to send a payment on the Lightning testnet. I'm running 3 nodes on 3 computers on my network. So far I've setup two channels, and sending sats between the channeled nodes has been fine.</p>
<p>A &lt;-&gt; B &lt;-&gt; C</p>
<p>However I'm now trying to send sats from A to C, which requires hopping through B, as A to C does not have a channel. I'm getting an error:</p>
<pre><code>Payment status: FAILED, reason: FAILURE_REASON_NO_ROUTE
</code></pre>
<p>Sync to graph appears to be true on all nodes:</p>
<pre><code>&quot;synced_to_graph&quot;: true
</code></pre>
<p>Balances are also fine, I'm only trying to send 1 sat at a time.</p>
<p>Here's the output log:</p>
<pre><code> Payment c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c in state terminate=false, active_shards=0, rem_value=1000 mSAT, fee_limit=1000 mSAT
 [DBG] CRTR: PaymentSession(c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c): pathfinding for amt=1000 mSAT
 [DBG] CRTR: Pathfinding perf metrics: nodes=0, edges=0, time=257.708µs
 [WRN] CRTR: Failed to find route for payment c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c: destination hop doesn't understand new TLV payloads
 [DBG] CRTR: Marking payment c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c permanently failed with no route: no_route
</code></pre>
<p>Any ideas? Thanks</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-03T20:45:19.850Z
When you open a channel, the balance initially sits completely on the channel opener's side. Did both A and C open the channels to B, so that now all the balance is on A's side in the A-B channel, and all the balance is on C's side in the B-C channel? I.e. are you sure that there is balance available in the right direction?
Murch
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-03T20:53:54.557Z
@Murch For A B, the balance sits at A. For B C, the balance sits on B. So I think A should be able to send to B, and B should be able to send to C in this instance.
user339946
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-03T21:18:27.550Z
Is 1 sat perhaps below the minimum HTLC size?
Murch
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-03T21:27:21.863Z
Not sure what the min HTLC is or where its set, but I tried higher values, and no luck. Running the queryroutes command is also a fail.
user339946
<lightning-network><lightning-routing>
Can't make 1 hop lightning payment, no route
user339946
# Can't make 1 hop lightning payment, no route

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-10-03)

I'm trying to send a payment on the Lightning testnet. I'm running 3 nodes on 3 computers on my network. So far I've setup two channels, and sending sats between the channeled nodes has been fine.
A <-> B <-> C
However I'm now trying to send sats from A to C, which requires hopping through B, as A to C does not have a channel. I'm getting an error:
Payment status: FAILED, reason: FAILURE_REASON_NO_ROUTE

Sync to graph appears to be true on all nodes:
"synced_to_graph": true

Balances are also fine, I'm only trying to send 1 sat at a time.
Here's the output log:
 Payment c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c in state terminate=false, active_shards=0, rem_value=1000 mSAT, fee_limit=1000 mSAT
 [DBG] CRTR: PaymentSession(c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c): pathfinding for amt=1000 mSAT
 [DBG] CRTR: Pathfinding perf metrics: nodes=0, edges=0, time=257.708µs
 [WRN] CRTR: Failed to find route for payment c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c: destination hop doesn't understand new TLV payloads
 [DBG] CRTR: Marking payment c0a4ae3b1ee3235b217e4d64f4c85140bc73543f7f0e109f2759bcb296dc474c permanently failed with no route: no_route

Any ideas? Thanks

**Tags:** lightning-network, lightning-routing

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: When you open a channel, the balance initially sits completely on the channel opener's side. Did both A and C open the channels to B, so that now all the balance is on A's side in the A-B channel, and all the balance is on C's side in the B-C channel? I.e. are you sure that there is balance available in the right direction?  
> **username_0**: @username_1 For A B, the balance sits at A. For B C, the balance sits on B. So I think A should be able to send to B, and B should be able to send to C in this instance.  
> **username_1**: Is 1 sat perhaps below the minimum HTLC size?  
> **username_0**: Not sure what the min HTLC is or where its set, but I tried higher values, and no luck. Running the queryroutes command is also a fail.  

---

## 0 answers

