Propose TP25 - Snapshots for DWeb Nodes #9
Conversation
thehenrytsai
changed the title
|
|
||
| This means the snapshot is taken at a global scope. ie. any message not included in the snapshot is deleted. | ||
|
|
||
| 1. `"scope": "protocols/<protocolUri>"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note for later discussion: The way you set this up looks like we can pretty easily define a snapshot scope that encompasses PermissionGrants. There are some difficulties with delegated grants+revokes that would be solved with this hierarchical snapshot scoping.
| const newerSnapshots = getNewerSnapshots(incomingSnapshot.timestamp); | ||
| for (const newerSnapshot of newerSnapshots) { | ||
| if (newerSnapshot.scope.isSuperSetOf(incomingSnapshot.scope)) { | ||
| return; // no need to process this snapshot |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Clarity: isSuperSetOf() should just be newerSnapshot.scope.startsWith(incomingSnapshot.scope), right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes conceptually... but there might be complication depending on if there is the trailing slash /.
e.g. 'aaaaaa/bbb'.startsWith('aaa') would return an unwanted true...
tp025/README.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| // computes the complete inclusion list at the scope of thd given snapshot | ||
| function computeInclusionList(currentSnapshot) { | ||
| // NOTE: immediate descending snapshots do NOT have to have direct child scope |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure what this means. If immediate descending snapshots don't need to be have direct child scope, what does "immediate descending" mean?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please help me word it better! If you look like the example snapshots of a DWN above, photos snapshot is an immediate descending snapshot of social-media protocol snapshot, but it is not a direct "child".
tp025/README.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| Messages under a particular protocol. | ||
|
|
||
| 1. `"scope": "protocols/<protocolUri>/<protocolPath>"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since protocol paths contain / as a delimiter, is it gonna be annoying to parse if we reuse / as a delimiter? It's definitely possible, not hard, just might be weird if we ever, for example, add a child scope below <protocolPath>.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, it is convenient right now that it is the last segment. Will be the complete opposite of convenient if we ever add descendants below protocolPaths. Actually, after reading your TP on permission, I am thinking it's probably good to append recordId as all leaf nodes in the structure....
|
|
||
| 1. It does not make sense functionally and even potentially dangerous even to allow scopes that span across both protocol-authorized messages and protocol-less message. | ||
|
|
||
| 1. It does not seem logical to permit the deletion of a snapshot once it is created for authorization purposes. If the snapshot is deleted, the DWeb Node will no longer be able to utilize the deleted snapshot to prevent unauthorized access. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In practice, does that mean a DWN could "un-snapshot" some messages by creating a new SnapshotsCreate with an empty list of CIDs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If one creates a SnapshotCreate with empty list of CIDs, I think the expressed intent is to blow away everything under the specified scope.
"un-snapshot" would be SnapshotsDelete in mind, just calling out here it's immediate implication (amongst other complications also), so I don't waste time designing/documenting it if we don't even want it.
No description provided.