-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(identify): implement signedPeerRecord #5785
Open
drHuangMHT
wants to merge
10
commits into
libp2p:master
Choose a base branch
from
drHuangMHT:identify-peer-record
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+226
−43
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2a09cdb
implement signedPeerRecord
drHuangMHT b5d7aec
apply suggestions
drHuangMHT 85d7496
Merge branch 'master' into identify-peer-record
drHuangMHT 4d3d692
add test
drHuangMHT 59f80f2
reduce diff
drHuangMHT ef89b5b
Merge branch 'master' into identify-peer-record
drHuangMHT 12b9a29
rename symbols
drHuangMHT d3d8ae6
prefer addresses in signedPeerRecord
drHuangMHT 59151b6
rename symbols
drHuangMHT 9b6a139
lint and fmt
drHuangMHT File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we really need to
deserialize
the record again? Can't we just read outPeerRecord::adddresses
:There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ahh we also need to check that the envelope key matches, but that can be done as well by reading the
PeerRecord::peer_id
and comparing it with the remote's id, right?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
record
has typeSignedEnvelope
, whose payload is in the form ofVec<u8>
(bytes) that doesn't haveaddresses
field unless we deserialize the payload intoPeerRecord
. In order to own the addresses the only way is to callrecord.addresses().to_vec()
which in this case allocates twice, which is unnecessary. So I extractedPeerRecord::try_deserialize_signed_envelope
to cut down allocation.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
PeerId
is derived from a public key, which indirectly proves its identity while the key itself does so directly. ID can collide, but the key is less likely, considering we support multiple key types. I believe it is safer to compare the keys directly when they are already present.