Closed blacktemplar closed 3 years ago
@vyzo do you know an answer here as a GossipSub expert?
we wanted to avoid the dependency between protobufs and a fixed payload; the PX extension was implemented before the envelope spec was finalized.
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021, 18:18 Max Inden @.***> wrote:
@vyzo https://github.com/vyzo do you know an answer here as a GossipSub expert?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/libp2p/specs/issues/300#issuecomment-815000192, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAI4SUKPW3N5YAWPN7BCITTHRZTVANCNFSM4SR6YGMA .
Thanks @vyzo.
Closing here since the above answers the question. @blacktemplar please follow up with another comment in case you would like to continue the discussion.
Is there any specific reason why the type of a
signedPeerRecord
in the protobuf message typePeerInfo
(https://github.com/libp2p/specs/blob/master/pubsub/gossipsub/gossipsub-v1.1.md#protobuf) isbytes
and not the protobuf message typeEnvelope
defined in the specs https://github.com/libp2p/specs/blob/rfc/address-records/RFC/0002-signed-envelopes.md#wire-format?