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

Gossip: Revisit 'Direct' peer functionality #389

Closed
Nashatyrev opened this issue Oct 21, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #398
Closed

Gossip: Revisit 'Direct' peer functionality #389

Nashatyrev opened this issue Oct 21, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #398

Comments

@Nashatyrev
Copy link
Collaborator

Nashatyrev commented Oct 21, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Summary

The notion of 'direct' peers had been added in Gossip v1.1 bu it looks like that feature has been poorly implemented/tested

Follow up to #387

Expected behavior

As per spec:

  • When publishing, 'direct' peers should be included unconditionally
    • but should we also consider subscriptions of direct peers? Looks like yes

Actual behavior

Is not the one expected

Relevant log output

No response

Possible Solution

No response

Version

No response

Would you like to work on fixing this bug ?

May be
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Gossip: direct peers handling fix tbenr/jvm-libp2p
1 participant
@Nashatyrev