-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 283
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
circuitv2: clarify what to do when data limit is reached #526
Conversation
This documents the rust-libp2p behaviour when more data than is allowed is transferred over a relayed connection. js-libp2p will take the same approach. go-libp2p may need to be updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @achingbrain improving the specification!
I suggest:
- Including going over
duration
. - Differentiating by direct connection and relayed connection.
- Specifying that both streams, to source and destination, should be reset.
Let me know what you think.
Should we update the revision to r3? |
Co-authored-by: Max Inden <[email protected]>
@MarcoPolo @marten-seemann all good for the go-libp2p side? |
relay/circuit-v2.md
Outdated
|
||
If more data than the limit specified in the `data` field is transferred | ||
over the relayed connection, or the relayed connection has been open for longer than `duration`, the relay should reset the stream to the source and the stream to the destination. If the reservation | ||
for the connection has expired the server may then apply any connection |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Who's the "server" here. Is it the relay? We probably shouldn't be using 2 different terms here.
The following sentence doesn't really make sense to me, as a relayed connection doesn't really show up as a normal connection in the connection manager.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
as a relayed connection doesn't really show up as a normal connection in the connection manager.
That sounds a bit too implementation-specific to me? I do agree though that the sentence is superfluous. "Do what you'd normally do" isn't really worth "specifying" I'd say.
No activity here in 2 weeks and this is approved. @p-shahi is this ready to merge? |
No, my review hasn’t been addressed yet. |
This documents the rust-libp2p behaviour when more data than is allowed is transferred over a relayed connection. js-libp2p will take the same approach. go-libp2p may need to be updated.