v0.1.0 #14

dryajov · 2017-08-16T17:04:52Z

NOTE: This ~~issue~~ comment is here for historic purposes, all further tracking is happening in ipfs/js-ipfs#830

dependent PRs:

Relevant issues:

Tasks:

Tests:

Dialer
- should dial over relay if no common transport exists
- should dial over specific relay
  - should dial over specific peer routed relay
  - should dial over specific relay on the provided transport
  - should dial over chained relay address
Listener
- Should receive relayed connections
Circuit relay
- Should listen on /libp2p/circuit/relay/1.0.0/hop and forward connections to dst

chore: adding default readme feat: reworking as a transport feat: getting peers communicating over relay (wip) feat: address in swarm [wip] feat: adding onion dial feat: adding onion dialing and tests feat: make circuit a full fledged transport refactor: split transport dialer and circuit logic test: adding dial tests feat: adding passive/active dialing test test: adding relay tests fix: several isues feat: consolidate and cleanup dialing feat: handle listenning circuit addresses correctly feat: make utils a factory feat: adding StreamHandler to aid with pull-stream read/write refactor: clean up and refactor relay and listener tests: adding more relay and listener tests tests: moving long multiaddr to a fixture feat: adding _writeErr to handle returning errors in relay.js fix: cleanup, moving setup code outside of dialer refactor: renaming Relay to Hop chore: fixing license chore: removing custom eslint config refactor: extract listening functionality into Stop handler fix: removing unused priority functionality fix: correct import of safe-buffer lint: remove unused import refactor: use async/setImmediate fix: remove unused constant refactor: move active/passive check out of _readDstAddr feat: initial readme write up fix: output correct circuit addresses feat: initial reimplementation of /hop /stop as a protobufs feat: reworking with protobufs feat: moving SUCCESS response to HOP from STOP feat: removing multihop (onion) dialing 0.0.3 fix: go-js integration test changes feat: adding dialer tests

daviddias · 2017-09-19T09:14:55Z

@dryajov could you update the first comment? Either remove the non-used checkboxes or fix them

daviddias

Please update to latest aegir, @dryajov

daviddias · 2017-10-13T15:36:48Z

@victorbjelkholm mind reviewing the whole PR and also check if the overall structure matches our common best practices?

victorb · 2017-10-17T21:47:00Z

Will review this first thing tomorrow.

victorb · 2017-10-17T21:49:20Z

circle.yml

+ - sudo dpkg -i libnss3*.deb
+ - sudo apt-get install -f
+ - sudo apt-get install --only-upgrade lsb-base
+ - sudo dpkg -i google-chrome.deb


This whole thing looks like a lot of fun, there is no simpler way? I seem to remember that one apt-get install -f should be enough after trying to install the .deb, then try to install the .deb again.

Or, possibly try using gdebi to figure out and install dependencies.

I think that file is pretty old, I'll grab a more recent one from some related project.

victorb · 2017-10-17T21:51:12Z

src/circuit/dialer.js

+ const strMa = ma.toString()
+ if (!strMa.includes('/p2p-circuit')) {
+ log.err('invalid circuit address')
+ throw new Error('invalid circuit address')


Should return the error in the callback here

victorb · 2017-10-18T10:45:22Z

README.md

+ - circumventing NAT layers
+ - route mangling for better privacy (matreshka/shallot dialing).
+
+ It's also possible to use it for clients that implement exotic transports such as devices that only have bluetooth radios to be reachable over bluethoot enabled relays and become full p2p nodes.


tiny typo: bluethoot

that readme needs some serious work tho...

victorb · 2017-10-18T10:46:32Z

README.md

+
+### libp2p-circuit and IPFS
+
+Prior to `libp2p-circuit` there was a rift in the IPFS network, were IPFS nodes could only access content from nodes that speak the same protocol, for example TCP only nodes could only dial to other TCP only nodes, same for any other protocol combination. In practice, this limitation was most visible in JS-IPFS browser nodes, since they can only dial out but not be dialed in over WebRTC or WebSockets, hence any content that the browser node held was not reachable by the rest of the network even through it was announced on the DHT. Non browser IPFS nodes would usually speak more than one protocol such as TCP, WebSockets and/or WebRTC, this made the problem less severe outside of the browser. `libp2p-circuit` solves this problem completely, as long as there are `relay nodes` capable of routing traffic between those nodes their content should be available to the rest of the IPFS network.


TCP only nodes could only dial to other TCP only nodes I don't think this is true (or badly worded at least). A node with a websocket and TCP transport could be dialed to from a TCP only node, or a websocket only node.

Yeah, I was trying to convey the fact that if only speaking one protocol nodes could be only dialed over that protocol. Awesome stuff tho... I need to really rework the readme.

victorb · 2017-10-18T10:48:41Z

README.md

+
+### Implementation rational
+
+This module is not a transport, however it implements `interface-transport` interface in order to allow circuit to be plugged with `libp2p-swarm`. The rational behind it is that, `libp2p-circuit` has a dial and listen flow, which fits nicely with other transports, moreover, it requires the _raw_ connection to be encrypted and muxed just as a regular transport's connection does. All in all, `interface-transport` ended up being the correct level of abstraction for circuit, as well as allowed us to reuse existing integration points in `libp2p-swarm` and `libp2p` without adding any ad-hoc logic. All parts of `interface-transport` are used, including `.getAddr` which returns a list of `/p2p-circuit` addresses that circuit is currently listening.


It looks like a transport, it quacks like a transport but it's not a transport?

hrm... yeah :)

So, it doesn't implement any transport protocol itself, it only hooks into the flow and delegates the communication to the underlying transports through swarm... There was some back and forth on why the interface was chousen, hence the explanation. This might need a bit more clarification as to why it is not a real transport.

victorb · 2017-10-18T10:49:16Z

README.md

+
+## License
+
+[MIT](LICENSE) © 2015-2016 Protocol Labs


Just put 2017 here instead

victorb · 2017-10-18T11:17:44Z

test/proto.spec.js

+ })
+
+ it(`should source and dest`, () => {
+ expect(message.srcPeer).to.not.be.null()


should be deep.equal check rather than not.be.null

hmm, there is nothing to deep.equal to in this test, the message is the result of serializing an object literal to protobuf. I don't think it make sense to deep equal it to itself or de-serialize it one more time and then deep equal? Tho, I'm open to suggestions. 👌 🤔

actually, I take that back! It makes perfect sense here ;-)

victorb · 2017-10-18T11:18:51Z

test/stop.spec.js

+ id: `QmQvM2mpqkjyXWbTHSUidUAWN26GgdMphTh9iGDdjgVXCy`,
+ addrs: [`/ipfs/QmQvM2mpqkjyXWbTHSUidUAWN26GgdMphTh9iGDdjgVXCy`]
+ }
+ }, new StreamHandler(conn), (conn) => {


seems the callback is missing err here. Can we also assert that conn is what we expect it to be? Same for the next test handle request with invalid multiaddr

dmitriy ryajov added 2 commits April 11, 2017 11:24

initial commit

b2bd6c9

dryajov added the in progress label Aug 16, 2017

dryajov requested review from daviddias, dignifiedquire, whyrusleeping and a user August 16, 2017 17:06

dryajov mentioned this pull request Aug 17, 2017

feat/v0.1.0 #9

Closed

53 tasks

feat: add getter for tag in circuit transport dialer

deb7f13

daviddias changed the title ~~Feat/v0.1.0~~ v0.1.0 Aug 23, 2017

This was referenced Aug 28, 2017

WIP - Awesome Relay Endeavour ipfs/js-ipfs#833

Closed

Awesome Endeavour: Circuit Relay ipfs/js-ipfs#830

Merged

dryajov added 6 commits September 1, 2017 16:39

feat: options, rename circuit to hop

35fbb73

fix: correctly incapsulate the peer id

501a298

fix: correct SUCCESS message return from STOP and HOP

6112b26

chore: upgrading peer-id and peer-info

10da18e

doc: adding listener documentation

ad93dfc

feat: handle active/passive relays

169be19

dryajov force-pushed the feat/v0.1.0 branch from 8fe69a5 to 169be19 Compare September 18, 2017 18:43

daviddias suggested changes Oct 13, 2017

View reviewed changes

daviddias requested review from victorb and removed request for a user, dignifiedquire and whyrusleeping October 13, 2017 15:35

test: porting to new aegir/jest

14841fa

ghost assigned dryajov Oct 15, 2017

dryajov added 2 commits October 15, 2017 11:07

chore: updating ci scripts

aba7824

chore: removing make test from travis yml

e3b5f12

dryajov added 2 commits October 15, 2017 12:45

test: use new aegir and dirty chai

72f60eb

linting

31cd958

victorb reviewed Oct 17, 2017

View reviewed changes

feat: return error in callback on dial

e605fa7

victorb reviewed Oct 18, 2017

View reviewed changes

test: fixing tests based on review feedback

bb4c38c

daviddias approved these changes Oct 21, 2017

View reviewed changes

daviddias merged commit ebce8cd into master Oct 21, 2017

daviddias deleted the feat/v0.1.0 branch October 21, 2017 07:26

ghost removed the in progress label Oct 21, 2017

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

v0.1.0 #14

v0.1.0 #14

dryajov commented Aug 16, 2017 •

edited

Loading

daviddias commented Sep 19, 2017

daviddias left a comment

daviddias commented Oct 13, 2017

victorb commented Oct 17, 2017

victorb Oct 17, 2017

dryajov Oct 17, 2017

victorb Oct 17, 2017

victorb Oct 18, 2017

dryajov Oct 18, 2017

victorb Oct 18, 2017

dryajov Oct 18, 2017

victorb Oct 18, 2017

dryajov Oct 18, 2017

dryajov Oct 18, 2017

victorb Oct 18, 2017

victorb Oct 18, 2017

dryajov Oct 18, 2017 •

edited

Loading

dryajov Oct 18, 2017

victorb Oct 18, 2017


		### libp2p-circuit and IPFS

		Prior to `libp2p-circuit` there was a rift in the IPFS network, were IPFS nodes could only access content from nodes that speak the same protocol, for example TCP only nodes could only dial to other TCP only nodes, same for any other protocol combination. In practice, this limitation was most visible in JS-IPFS browser nodes, since they can only dial out but not be dialed in over WebRTC or WebSockets, hence any content that the browser node held was not reachable by the rest of the network even through it was announced on the DHT. Non browser IPFS nodes would usually speak more than one protocol such as TCP, WebSockets and/or WebRTC, this made the problem less severe outside of the browser. `libp2p-circuit` solves this problem completely, as long as there are `relay nodes` capable of routing traffic between those nodes their content should be available to the rest of the IPFS network.


		### Implementation rational

		This module is not a transport, however it implements `interface-transport` interface in order to allow circuit to be plugged with `libp2p-swarm`. The rational behind it is that, `libp2p-circuit` has a dial and listen flow, which fits nicely with other transports, moreover, it requires the _raw_ connection to be encrypted and muxed just as a regular transport's connection does. All in all, `interface-transport` ended up being the correct level of abstraction for circuit, as well as allowed us to reuse existing integration points in `libp2p-swarm` and `libp2p` without adding any ad-hoc logic. All parts of `interface-transport` are used, including `.getAddr` which returns a list of `/p2p-circuit` addresses that circuit is currently listening.

v0.1.0 #14

v0.1.0 #14

Conversation

dryajov commented Aug 16, 2017 • edited Loading

daviddias commented Sep 19, 2017

daviddias left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

daviddias commented Oct 13, 2017

victorb commented Oct 17, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dryajov Oct 18, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dryajov commented Aug 16, 2017 •

edited

Loading

dryajov Oct 18, 2017 •

edited

Loading