Added the first draft of Route Broadcasting Protocol #455

dora-gt · 2018-08-13T06:21:11Z

Added the first draft of Route Broadcasting Protocol based on this issue: #432, including ASN.1 definition.
Please check the description.

It seems that there are some unused fields, so either of removing or implementing may be required.

sappenin · 2018-08-20T14:58:53Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/0000-route-broadcasting-protocol.md

+#### Procedure
+Route Update is done in the following procedure:
+
+- A node requests an update to the corresponded node with information of route update logs.


One thing that's unclear here is which node does what, and how this relates to the different relationships defined in Node Requirements (draft). Perhaps we need to define the Requestor and the Counterpart more formally?

If my understanding is correct, NodeA will send a RouteControlRequest to NodeB, and then NodeB will enter the SYNC mode. Next, NodeA will send a RouteUpdateRequest with added or withdrawn routes.

I suppose that if NodeA is a child of NodeB, however, then the original RouteControlRequest would fail?

Added Operation Model section to make the roles clear.
Does this help?

It seems that if a child node is configured to receive route updates, and the parent is not configured to send routes, it fails.
(works only when the child is configured to receive route updates, and the parent is configured to send route updtes also)

I'll add some statements for it.

sappenin · 2018-08-20T15:00:03Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/0000-route-broadcasting-protocol.md

+
+- A node requests an update to the corresponded node with information of route update logs.
+- The corresponded node updates its routing table, and respond that the request is done.
+- If the request cannot be deserialized or interpreted as appropriate, the corresponded node responds error.


It would be good to also add summary notes about what should happen between Child, Peer, and Parent nodes with regard to the overall protocol.

Added Link Relations and Routing section and modified Procedure sections a bit. What do you think?

sappenin · 2018-08-20T15:07:23Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/RouteBroadcastingProtocol.asn

+Auth ::= OCTET STRING (SIZE (32))
+
+Property ::= SEQUENCE {
+  meta UInt8,


It might be worth defining the meaning of meta. See ilp-protocol-ccp for some examples of the data encoded into this byte field.

From what I can tell, the following fields exist: optional, transitive, partial, isUtf8. It's unclear, however, from the source code in ilp-protocol-ccp what each of these mean.

@adrianhopebailie, @justmoon for more details?

I actually knew the options but I hesitated writing it because it seemed that the options were not used. Should I write it nevertheless?

I think it would be fine if these definitions were written later (e.g., after merging this PR), although the terms are used in the source-code (though undocumented), and so it would be good to outline them in the event some implementation wanted to start using them.

I added some statements about meta.
I can imagine what these flags mean, but those are not certain, so I didn't write the exact meaning of the flags at this point.

sappenin · 2018-08-20T15:12:05Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/RouteBroadcastingProtocol.asn

+  routingTableId RoutingTableId, -- the routing table ID that the requesting node knows at that point
+  currentEpochIndex UInt32, -- current epoch index of the node that requests the update for the other nodes
+  fromEpochIndex UInt32, -- the epoch index that the log of this update request starts from
+  toEpochIndex UInt32, -- the epoch index that the log of this update request ends at


I assume this is inclusive (as opposed to exclusive), but might be worth stating directly. For example, if fromEpoch=1, and toEpoch=3, then I would expect 3 routes (1, 2, and 3).

I referred to this code:
https://github.com/interledgerjs/ilp-connector/blob/master/src/routing/ccp-sender.ts#L182-L186
and this specification:
https://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-15.4.4.10

As a conclusion, in my opinion, 3 is not included in your case. See the picture below.

Am I wrong?

Yes, I think you're right. In that case, we should use the term exclusive, like this:

the epoch index that the log of this update request ends at, exclusive

sappenin · 2018-08-20T15:12:32Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/RouteBroadcastingProtocol.asn

+  currentEpochIndex UInt32, -- current epoch index of the node that requests the update for the other nodes
+  fromEpochIndex UInt32, -- the epoch index that the log of this update request starts from
+  toEpochIndex UInt32, -- the epoch index that the log of this update request ends at
+  holdDownTime UInt32, -- reserved for the future, currently not used


Despite not being used, can we document what this means?

I wanted to specify, but I could not find any reference to determine the function.
@justmoon Could you give me some reference?

sappenin · 2018-08-20T15:14:46Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/RouteBroadcastingProtocol.asn

+  toEpochIndex UInt32, -- the epoch index that the log of this update request ends at
+  holdDownTime UInt32, -- reserved for the future, currently not used
+  speaker Address, -- the ILP address of the requesting node
+  addedRoutes SEQUENCE OF NewRoute, -- the added routes


Consider changing to New Routes that the speaker is advertising to the counterpart node

sappenin · 2018-08-20T15:15:18Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/RouteBroadcastingProtocol.asn

+  holdDownTime UInt32, -- reserved for the future, currently not used
+  speaker Address, -- the ILP address of the requesting node
+  addedRoutes SEQUENCE OF NewRoute, -- the added routes
+  withdrawnRoutes SEQUENCE OF Address -- the withdrawn routes


Consider changing to: Withdrawn Routes that the speaker is advertising as being no longer valid or useful.

…oute-broadcasting-protocol

dora-gt · 2018-08-21T05:05:28Z

@sappenin Thank you so much for the input.
I'll fix soon. Give me a day.

dora-gt · 2018-08-22T08:11:24Z

@sappenin I fixed some of your inputs as far as I could at this point.
Some of your inputs need more arguments or references from someone who knows well.

sappenin · 2018-08-22T14:16:32Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/0000-route-broadcasting-protocol.md

+On the other hand, in a `Peer` and `Peer` relation, the two nodes have different addresses respectively, and the further connected addresses are unclear. So in this case, it is generally helpful to configure to exchange routing information each other.
+
+Conclusively, the following is the general configuration of nodes depending on the relations.
+- `Peer` and `Peer`


Consider using to instead of and in these cases, so it would read like this:

Peer to Peer.

BTP connections could be opened from each side, and to makes us imagine it is directional, so I thought and was more appropriate in this case. Though I don't have the native sense of English, I'll follow your opinion. Amended the lines.

sappenin · 2018-08-22T14:17:48Z

0000-route-broadcasting-protocol/0000-route-broadcasting-protocol.md

@@ -162,6 +188,7 @@ Route Update is done in the following procedure:

 - A node sends a route update request to the corresponded node with information of route update logs.
 - The receiver node updates its routing table, and responds that the request is done.
+- If the receiving node is not configured to receive route updates, the receiving node responds error.


Minor nit, should read: ...the receiving node responds with an error

Fixed to use prepositions.

sappenin · 2018-09-29T17:01:09Z

bumping to keep this from getting closed by Stalebot.

dora-gt · 2019-02-13T02:09:58Z

We have to define how auth field is used.
I met Stefan at SF and heard about it but I could not understand the exact security model of it. I'm sorry.

stale · 2019-03-30T10:03:32Z

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

If this issue is important, please feel free to bring it up on the next Interledger Community Group Call or in the Gitter chat.

emschwartz · 2019-03-30T13:04:56Z

I'm finally trying to dig into CCP. Thanks @dora-gt for putting this together -- it's super helpful! Much easier to understand than the code in ilp-connector :)

Fixes Issue #83 with the following changes: * Refactor the CCPSender to track epochs and incoming routes on a per-peer basis (see interledger/rfcs#455) * Refactor Routing services into `RouteBroadcaster` and `ExternalRoutingService` * Refactor RoutingTables to properly store incoming/outgoing routes separately from the Log of routes. * Fix epoch tracking for all components. * Properly load all route-types at startup. Signed-off-by: David Fuelling <[email protected]>

* Fixes Issue #83 with the following changes: * Refactor the CCPSender to track epochs and incoming routes on a per-peer basis (see interledger/rfcs#455) * Refactor Routing services into `RouteBroadcaster` and `ExternalRoutingService` * Refactor RoutingTables to properly store incoming/outgoing routes separately from the Log of routes. * Fix epoch tracking for all components. * Properly load all route-types at startup. * Remove unused Local AccountRelationship * Javadoc updates * Remove PostProcessor * This existed as an experiment for performance optimization purposes, but was overall a terrible idea. Plus, it turned out to be unnecessary. Signed-off-by: David Fuelling <[email protected]>

stale · 2019-06-08T20:50:04Z

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

If this issue is important, please feel free to bring it up on the next Interledger Community Group Call or in the Gitter chat.

stale · 2019-10-18T16:46:24Z

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

If this issue is important, please feel free to bring it up on the next Interledger Community Group Call or in the Gitter chat.

dora-gt added 2 commits August 13, 2018 15:13

Added first draft of Route Broadcasting Protocol

9d97a53

added a link for uuid

c993f9e

adrianhopebailie requested a review from justmoon August 13, 2018 13:17

sappenin reviewed Aug 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

sappenin requested changes Aug 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

sappenin reviewed Aug 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into feature/dora-gt/r…

877cec2

…oute-broadcasting-protocol

dora-gt added 4 commits August 21, 2018 17:37

fix to make the roles clear

da61857

added explanation of link-relation and routing

ecedc96

fix

b779122

fixed comments on asn.1

1cf2355

dora-gt added 2 commits August 22, 2018 17:54

fixed, the same modification as ILDCP

fba9c24

fixed ASN.1

2039c23

sappenin reviewed Aug 22, 2018

View reviewed changes

sappenin requested a review from adrianhopebailie August 22, 2018 14:22

dora-gt and others added 6 commits August 23, 2018 11:18

added statements of meta

0ad41d3

added exclusive

b65f3b4

fixed, and -> to

c757046

added prepositional phrase

b451590

Merge branch 'master' into feature/dora-gt/route-broadcasting-protocol

d4a5b5f

added explanation of routing

cf5b912

stale bot added the wontfix label Sep 29, 2018

removed wrong explanation

e02a1b7

Merge branch 'master' into feature/dora-gt/route-broadcasting-protocol

33b4586

adrianhopebailie closed this Feb 28, 2019

adrianhopebailie reopened this Feb 28, 2019

stale bot added the wontfix label Mar 30, 2019

stale bot removed the wontfix label Mar 30, 2019

stale bot added the wontfix label Apr 29, 2019

stale bot closed this May 6, 2019

interledger deleted a comment from stale bot May 9, 2019

adrianhopebailie added ilp Related to the core protocol specs spec debt and removed wontfix labels May 9, 2019

adrianhopebailie reopened this May 9, 2019

Merge branch 'master' into feature/dora-gt/route-broadcasting-protocol

55da909

stale bot added the wontfix label Jun 8, 2019

stale bot closed this Jun 15, 2019

sappenin reopened this Sep 18, 2019

stale bot removed the wontfix label Sep 18, 2019

stale bot added the wontfix label Oct 18, 2019

sappenin mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2019

Unit and integration test coverage for CCP (routing table propagation) interledger4j/ilpv4-connector#356

Open

stale bot closed this Oct 25, 2019

emschwartz mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2019

Towards a v1.0 interledger/interledger-rs#557

Open

12 tasks

gakonst mentioned this pull request Dec 18, 2019

interledger-ccp API review for v1.0-rc interledger/interledger-rs#571

Closed

8 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Added the first draft of Route Broadcasting Protocol #455

Added the first draft of Route Broadcasting Protocol #455

dora-gt commented Aug 13, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt Aug 21, 2018

dora-gt Aug 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 20, 2018

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 22, 2018

dora-gt Aug 23, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 20, 2018

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018

sappenin Aug 22, 2018

sappenin Aug 20, 2018

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018

sappenin Aug 20, 2018

sappenin Aug 20, 2018

dora-gt commented Aug 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt commented Aug 22, 2018

sappenin Aug 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt Aug 23, 2018

sappenin Aug 22, 2018

dora-gt Aug 23, 2018

sappenin commented Sep 29, 2018

dora-gt commented Feb 13, 2019

stale bot commented Mar 30, 2019

emschwartz commented Mar 30, 2019

stale bot commented Jun 8, 2019

stale bot commented Oct 18, 2019

Added the first draft of Route Broadcasting Protocol #455

Added the first draft of Route Broadcasting Protocol #455

Conversation

dora-gt commented Aug 13, 2018 • edited Loading

sappenin Aug 20, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dora-gt Aug 21, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sappenin Aug 20, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dora-gt Aug 23, 2018 • edited Loading

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

dora-gt commented Aug 21, 2018 • edited Loading

dora-gt commented Aug 22, 2018

sappenin Aug 22, 2018 • edited Loading

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

sappenin commented Sep 29, 2018

dora-gt commented Feb 13, 2019

stale bot commented Mar 30, 2019

emschwartz commented Mar 30, 2019

stale bot commented Jun 8, 2019

stale bot commented Oct 18, 2019

dora-gt commented Aug 13, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt Aug 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt Aug 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt Aug 23, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dora-gt commented Aug 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

sappenin Aug 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading