This one took about 2.1× the usual for LBC/LTC. Waiting longer than usual is not in itself a failure: a swap waits on confirmations from both chains, and a slow block or a busy network stretches it.
The record stops at MakerPaymentSpendFailed. The taker's claim on the maker's coin was rejected; it can be retried for as long as that payment is unspent.
taker_swap:2008] "utxo_common:998] utxo_common:950] client:985] JsonRpcError { client_info: "coin: LBC", request: JsonRpcRequest { jsonrpc: "2.0", id: 12251, method: " ", params: }, error: Internal("All servers errored: [(, Transport(\"Failed to establish connection: Temporary(\\\"Couldn't connect…
By this step both payments were on their chains and the price had been struck, so the trade counts toward the reference price. The claim can still be made for as long as the payment is unspent, and since the timelock has passed the payer can take it back as well, so whichever lands first settles it. Whether it was retried is a question for the chain rather than for this log.
The chain shows the maker's payment still sitting in its contract: neither claimed nor refunded. The maker had already collected the taker's payment by this step, so the taker paid and has not received the maker's coin. The secret is public, so the taker's claim can still be made; the timelock expired 2025-12-20 00:29:29 UTC, so the maker can take it back now. Checked 2026-11-06 04:46:49 UTC. It will be asked again.
Wondering whether this one is yours? SwapScope cannot tell you: the parties are salted hashes, so that nobody can test a key against this data, and that cuts both ways. Search this swap's uuid in your own wallet's swap history, or open the payment transaction above on a block explorer and see whether the address paying into it is one of yours.
a2d426c8c3efb734dad36161ed0418b9a0576fde241e6d12be18b8ba2017c810
Both payments are on their chains and locked to the same secret hash f5414d6ef445bc413a3d2aa67f64faf6328022b3, and a preimage hashing to it was published on chain when one side claimed.
- MakerPaymentSent · MakerPaymentReceived: a2d426c8c3efb734dad36161ed0418b9a0576fde241e6d12be18b8ba2017c810
942dc523addb88516f0e8532f56cf312cc0dc407666e0d6c4b7689ed03f47e18
Both payments are on their chains and locked to the same secret hash f5414d6ef445bc413a3d2aa67f64faf6328022b3, and a preimage hashing to it was published on chain when one side claimed.
- TakerFeeSent · TakerFeeValidated: bd7d3acd7dd8c7981395a635a4fc441ee6e47f7eab995badbb6632b40a4e5167
- TakerPaymentReceived · TakerPaymentSent: 942dc523addb88516f0e8532f56cf312cc0dc407666e0d6c4b7689ed03f47e18
- TakerPaymentSpent: 1050f082b473402599cb66b589b0282af49281858b7eef22db8fa62f2b33ed9c
No flags are stored against this swap. Flags are written while a swap sits inside a live pricing window, so on an older swap their absence means it was never assessed rather than that it was assessed and found clean.
Reported by defistats-gleec.