chore(CRP-2617): Generalize CUP’s ChainKeyInitialization - #2337
Merged
Conversation
Sawchord
marked this pull request as ready for review
October 31, 2024 13:31
fspreiss
reviewed
Oct 31, 2024
aterga
reviewed
Nov 1, 2024
eichhorl
approved these changes
Nov 1, 2024
aterga
reviewed
Nov 4, 2024
Co-authored-by: Arshavir Ter-Gabrielyan <arshavir.ter.gabrielyan@dfinity.org>
aterga
approved these changes
Nov 6, 2024
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR extends the
ChainKeyInitializationwith a variant forInitialNiDkgTranscriptRecord. This is needed to support subnets with VetKeys.Note on compatibility:
We are moving a single field of
ChainKeyInitializationinto aoneof, that has another variant.Since
oneofs in Protobuf are simply invariants that checks that only one of the specified fields is populated, this does not change the wire representation of this type, if theinitializationis of variantdealings(See protobuf language guide).This code then simply adapts the client code (NNS registry and consensus) to reflect the changes. Since we don't introduce any code that creates the newly introduced
transcriptvariant, this code does not introduce incompatibilities, so no migration code is necessary.The changes for the registry that make use of the new
transcriptvariant are planned in a later PR, but a number of pieces have to be in place first, such as the management endpoints and the consensus code.