Skip to content
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

Ipns Consistency #296

Merged
merged 10 commits into from Nov 16, 2014
Merged

Ipns Consistency #296

merged 10 commits into from Nov 16, 2014

Conversation

whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

This PR changes the DHT so that it stores records instead of simple values. This allows us to add a layer of security onto the DHT, and also allows us to validate values that are stored in it.

Currently, only two value types are allows to be stored in the DHT:

  • Public Keys
    • Public keys are verified by checking their hash against the key.
    • relevant code
  • Ipns Records
    • Ipns records are verified by unmarshalling them, checking their validity type, and then performing the proper validity checks from there
    • relevant code

Other types of Ipns Validity functions should be discussed, as only one is implemented. More complex checks may require a change in how the validity functions are called (maybe add new parameters, etc).

@whyrusleeping whyrusleeping added the status/in-progress In progress label Nov 12, 2014
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
{
"ImportPath": "github.com/jbenet/go-ipfs",
"GoVersion": "go1.3",
"GoVersion": "devel +9340f9f6dfc9 Fri Oct 31 00:48:57 2014 -0300",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

:(

@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Nov 13, 2014

Great PR, as always. A few codebase-friendliness comments up there, but all this LGTM!

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member Author

@jbenet am i good to merge?

@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Nov 16, 2014

@whyrusleeping depends, did the commands merge change anything here? we've officially deprecated cmd/ipfs until we migrate cmd/ipfs2 -> cmd/ipfs. Seems like no, but just verifying...

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member Author

If you merged over the ipfs name code then no, nothing should have changed.

@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Nov 16, 2014

merged over the ipfs name code

??

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member Author

I mean, if you've ported over the code for ipfs name publish and ipfs name resolve from the original commands set, everything should work great

@btc
Copy link
Contributor

btc commented Nov 16, 2014

those have been ported

@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Nov 16, 2014

I'm going to rebase this on top of new master first.

@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Nov 16, 2014

jbenet added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2014
@jbenet jbenet merged commit 6f8569d into master Nov 16, 2014
@jbenet jbenet removed the status/in-progress In progress label Nov 16, 2014
@jbenet jbenet deleted the consistency branch November 16, 2014 10:51
ariescodescream pushed a commit to ariescodescream/go-ipfs that referenced this pull request Oct 23, 2021
When a peer is found, add its addr to the peerstore, just like the addresses for closer peers are added. In particular this is helpful for followup queries by the DHT user.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants