-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 87
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
Inform Consensus Layer whether a bootstrap peer should be considered remote #4815
Comments
To address this we need to extend |
For relays this is exactly what we want. |
Am I right understanding that by adding a |
I realised that Consensus might actually be interested in a signal from the outbound governor which summarises all connections. If we just expose This would be handy in other areas as well (e.g. churn). So here's another proposal. The |
I don't see how exposing targets would work for consensus, since they have to know which peers are local and which peers are not, right? |
I used wrong name, it's about counters not targets. |
@karknu had raised a concern about the Bootstrap State Machine (ie IntersectMBO/ouroboros-consensus#808) that would be most naturally mitigated by the Diffusion Layer annotating new peers with whether or not that peer should be considered remote.
EG SPOs separately configure the "local trusted" portion of the topology from the "bootstrap peers source" of the topology. If that distinction would be preserved deep enough into the code, then the Bootstrap State Machine would simply refuse to transition from TooOld to YoungEnough while it only has local peers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: