-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
(bug)signatureV1 vs signature #217
Comments
Thank you for submitting your first issue to this repository! A maintainer will be here shortly to triage and review.
Finally, remember to use https://discuss.ipfs.io if you just need general support. |
The field name is not written into the protobuf, only the field number so this is compatible with go-ipns and isn't a bug in terms of behaviour, though it would be good to use the same field name as the spec. |
Adds a `v1Compatible` option when creating IPNS records that will cause the V1 signature to be added to the record. This option defaults to true, in the future it will be changed to false. The value types have also been updated to make it harder to create invalid records. It now accepts only CIDs, PeerIds, or arbitrary path strings prefixed with `"/"`. BREAKING CHANGE: all /ipns/* keys are now encoded as base36 encoded CIDv1 libp2p-cid Closes #217 --------- Co-authored-by: Marcin Rataj <lidel@lidel.org> Co-authored-by: Alex Potsides <alex@achingbrain.net>
js-ipns/src/pb/ipns.proto
Line 14 in 675aa64
Isn't this supposed to be
signatureV1
in accordance with the spec and go-impl:https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipns/blob/72be64e27e743b828fe4eb8a721abd1b97610421/pb/ipns.proto#L13
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: