Open plopezlpz opened 5 days ago
@fryorcraken FYI
I see there are a lot of message type. I think we should do a table with the following columns:
then we can review with Status to fill in the last column.
I'm wondering should we update the MVDS spec to include this information, and use the spec as the source of truth? should we duplicate mvds spec to waku/specs from custodian perspective?
cc @jm-clius
I'm wondering should we update the MVDS spec
I don't think the application usage should be part of the MVDS spec (which is app agnostic). We will certainly update Status protocol specs to include what reliability mechanisms they use. For now we can probably maintain a general Status Reliability raw spec in which we add information like the above. Note however that it's likely to change many times as we integrate e2e reliability more and more widely.
Here is the sheet, it's hard to collect all the columns as the message types are spreading in the codebase.
Problem
We want to list all current messages types that are using MVDS and discuss if others should be included. This is a list of all message types: https://github.com/status-im/status-go/blob/65867d884e75094a4f76cc1d999f184bfdb3a268/protocol/messenger_handlers.go#L19 We want to know which ones use MVDS currently.
Acceptance Criteria
List of messages types using MVDS written and assesment if we need others to be using MVDS. If others need to use MVDS or existing ones should not be using it then a ticket to modify that.