Whats up LND Builders and Group,

I am going through a extremely uncommon and significant situation the place on-chain funds related to a previous LND channel closure are inaccessible, regardless of my Bitcoin Core node (v29.0.0, RPi5, totally synced after recent IBD, txindex=1) confirming the UTXO’s existence through scantxoutset. Nevertheless, each listunspent and exterior pockets software program (Sparrow) fail to notice this UTXO, and crucially, the tackle holding the funds can’t be derived from my LND root key utilizing normal strategies.

System & Historical past:

LND: v0.18.5-beta (upgraded from v0.5.2-beta). Confirmed just one pockets.db used all through.

Bitcoin Core: v29.0.0 (RPi5), totally synced post-IBD, txindex=1 reviews synced: true. Datadir /mnt/hdd/bitcoin.

Channel Historical past: Opened Mar 2019 (LND v0.5.2, Funding Tx: 7060…9d71), later force-closed by peer.

Sweep Transaction: On Apr 1, 2024 (Block 837257), Tx 4c0407b1188e0ba39313b1d9c87c49f6c81d99aa2839026c8af8c989ce102244 spent the channel output, sending ~0.01495 BTC to P2WPKH tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz.

On-Chain Verification: Explorers affirm this UTXO (4c04…:0) exists and is unspent at bc1qt7…g8qz.

The Core Drawback & Contradictions:

After a full IBD and guaranteeing txindex is synced on my Bitcoin Core node:

getrawtransaction 4c04... true SUCCEEDS: The node is aware of the historical past of the funding transaction.

scantxoutset begin '["addr(bc1qt7...)"]' SUCCEEDS and RETURNS THE UTXO: This straight confirms that the node’s chainstate (UTXO set) database IS CORRECT and accommodates the unspent output for bc1qt7…g8qz.

{
  "success": true, ...
  "unspents": [ { "txid": "4c04...", "vout": 0, ... "address": "bc1qt7...", "amount": 0.01495437 ... } ],
  "total_amount": 0.01495437
}

listunspent ... '["bc1qt7..."]' (utilizing -rpcwallet="" or different loaded wallets) returns []: Regardless of the UTXO current within the chainstate, the wallet-specific RPC name fails to listing it.

Sparrow Pockets (recent set up, linked to this node) exhibits 0 steadiness: When importing the confirmed LND root xprv and configuring for BIP84 (m/84’/0’/0′, Native Segwit P2WPKH), Sparrow completes scanning however exhibits 0 steadiness and lists no UTXOs, failing to see the UTXO that the node is aware of exists (per scantxoutset).

Parallel Pockets Derivation Failure:

Utilizing the confirmed root xprv (extracted from the right pockets.db through chantools showrootkey), intensive checks with offline instruments (bip39-standalone.html) on normal BIP84 paths (m/84’/0’/0’/0/* and m/84’/0’/0’/1/*) did not derive the tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz after checking hundreds of thousands of addresses.

Present Standing & Pressing Questions:

I’ve on-chain funds at bc1qt7…g8qz that my node essentially is aware of about (per scantxoutset), however that are inaccessible through normal pockets RPCs (listunspent) and exterior wallets (Sparrow). Compounding that is the failure to derive this particular tackle from the LND root key utilizing normal BIP84 paths.

Looking for professional assistance on:

Why would listunspent (even with the right pockets specified) and exterior wallets like Sparrow fail to notice a UTXO when scantxoutset on the identical node confirms its existence within the UTXO set? Is that this a recognized Core bug, a difficulty with how wallets question non-owned addresses, or one thing else?

Given the derivation failure, is it potential for LND (esp. after main model jumps) to brush funds to an tackle not derivable through normal BIP84 paths from the aezeed root key? Might a bug or particular state result in utilizing a special derivation scheme or perhaps a key unrelated to the principle pockets for sweep outputs?

Are there any superior strategies or instruments (LND debug instructions, particular chantools utilization, various pockets software program recognized to deal with edge circumstances) that would both:

a) Pressure Sparrow/LND to acknowledge the UTXO based mostly on the node’s chainstate affirmation?

b) Assist definitively hint the derivation path (even when non-standard) used to generate bc1qt7…g8qz from my pockets.db/xprv?

This example appears extremely anomalous. Any insights or steerage can be extraordinarily appreciated.

Thanks.