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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add experimental WebRTC support to multiaddr #2371

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 14, 2022
Merged

Add experimental WebRTC support to multiaddr #2371

merged 3 commits into from
Jun 14, 2022

Conversation

tomaka
Copy link
Contributor

@tomaka tomaka commented Jun 10, 2022 •
edited
Loading

cc @mxinden if you're interested
cc #1712

The payload of /certhash isn't documented in libp2p/specs#412.
I suspect that ultimately people will want to make /certhash super generic and future-proof and over-engineered and all (in case in the vague future it might eventually be used for something else, even though we all know that this will likely never happen), but for now I went with a fixed 32 bytes payload that is hexadecimal-encoded without the 0x prefix. The certificate hash is put as hexadecimal in the SDP packet, so an hexadecimal payload will make it a bit easier to debug if things work.

This is all marked as experimental- until we finish implementing it, so that there's no possible confusion with versions that are incompatible with each other and that kind of things.

@tomaka tomaka requested a review from melekes June 10, 2022 09:09
mergify[bot]
mergify bot approved these changes Jun 10, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Automatically approving tomaka's pull requests. This auto-approval will be removed once more maintainers are active.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jun 10, 2022 •
edited
Loading

twiggy diff report

Difference in .wasm size before and after this pull request.

 Delta Bytes │ Item
─────────────┼─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
       +2574 ┊ <F as nom::internal::Parser<I,O,E>>::parse::h4238c4df4b8a7a6d
       -2284 ┊ <F as nom::internal::Parser<I,O,E>>::parse::h9c8613594a855ced
       +2166 ┊ smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::ProtocolRef::from_str_parts::hd6845018a76ac9be
       -1783 ┊ smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::ProtocolRef::from_str_parts::h502df8508dcbe761
       +1342 ┊ <smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::ProtocolRef as core::fmt::Display>::fmt::h789d46a1f96b0823
       -1189 ┊ <smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::ProtocolRef as core::fmt::Display>::fmt::h007b9cfa865301ad
        +923 ┊ smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::ProtocolRef::as_bytes::h1f662594db2f0a7c
        -880 ┊ smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::ProtocolRef::as_bytes::he29e540017c9d888
        +394 ┊ <&mut nom::combinator::ParserIterator<Input,Error,F> as core::iter::traits::iterator::Iterator>::next::hc5ba5890d1674a91
        -394 ┊ <&mut nom::combinator::ParserIterator<Input,Error,F> as core::iter::traits::iterator::Iterator>::next::hde7d393f33f41113
        -354 ┊ <F as nom::internal::Parser<I,O,E>>::parse::h1ab6e5f8477c224e
        -325 ┊ <&mut nom::combinator::ParserIterator<Input,Error,F> as core::iter::traits::iterator::Iterator>::next::haedc399748f6729e
        +296 ┊ <&mut nom::combinator::ParserIterator<Input,Error,F> as core::iter::traits::iterator::Iterator>::next::hc66e3b2c359f3494
        -294 ┊ core::iter::traits::iterator::Iterator::last::h76ecbef1631d6438
        +290 ┊ <F as nom::internal::Parser<I,O,E>>::parse::hee70a6656aba86d5
        +211 ┊ core::iter::traits::iterator::Iterator::last::h403f283364672c20
        +175 ┊ smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::protocol::h55642c962adf662c
        -175 ┊ smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::protocol::h9fb880c3390fb605
        +112 ┊ data[0]
         -63 ┊ <smoldot::libp2p::multiaddr::Multiaddr as core::str::traits::FromStr>::from_str::ha3047e9bbe9dbf60
         -24 ┊ ... and 7 more.
        +718 ┊ Σ [27 Total Rows]

melekes
melekes approved these changes Jun 14, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@melekes melekes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@tomaka tomaka added the automerge Automatically merge pull request as soon as possible label Jun 14, 2022
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 7a85c3d into paritytech:main Jun 14, 2022
@tomaka tomaka deleted the webrtc-multiaddr branch June 14, 2022 10:22
@mxinden
Copy link

mxinden commented Jun 14, 2022

I suspect that ultimately people will want to make /certhash super generic and future-proof and over-engineered and all (in case in the vague future it might eventually be used for something else, even though we all know that this will likely never happen), but for now I went with a fixed 32 bytes payload that is hexadecimal-encoded without the 0x prefix. The certificate hash is put as hexadecimal in the SDP packet, so an hexadecimal payload will make it a bit easier to debug if things work.

I would be in favor of being consistent with the way /certhash is encoded in the WebTransport specification. The current draft suggests:

a list of multihashes of the certificates

libp2p/specs#404

@tomaka would you consider a multihash as "super generic" already? 👼

@tomaka
Copy link
Contributor Author

tomaka commented Jun 14, 2022

A browser client, in order to connect, must know specifically the SHA256 hash of the certificate.
In other words, all multiaddrs of the form .../webrtc/certhash/<hash> are undialable unless <hash> is SHA256.
Which means that the byte in the multihash that says "this multihash is SHA256" is redundant. And since a SHA256 hash is always 32 bytes, the length is also redundant.
So yes I would consider a multihash too generic.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mergify mergify[bot] mergify[bot] approved these changes

@melekes melekes melekes approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
automerge Automatically merge pull request as soon as possible
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@tomaka @mxinden @melekes