feat(p2p): implement hole punching #126
Conversation
dignifiedquire
force-pushed
the
feat-autonat
branch
from
0ea074a
to
5c5c1b0
Compare
dignifiedquire
changed the title
|
🚀 I will take a closer look. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let me know how well this is working. Also let me know in case you need any additional infrastructure to test this against.
(Hole punching client side is slowly rolling out on IPFS, thus you might as well already be able to punch with a Golang client.)
Again, happy to see this happening!
| relay_client: Toggle<relay::v2::client::Client>, | ||
| dcutr: Toggle<dcutr::behaviour::Behaviour>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ideally we would have an AndBehaviour, that way you could do:
hole_punching_client: Toggle<AndBehaviour<relay::v2::client::Client, dcutr::behaviour::Behaviour>>`That way it is enforced at compile time that you always either enable both or disable both.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yep, that would would be nice
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Tracked here: libp2p/rust-libp2p#2719
| // TODO: should we remove them at some point? | ||
| if protocols | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .any(|p| p.as_bytes() == b"/libp2p/autonat/1.0.0") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about exposing the protocol ID as a constant from libp2p-autonat and using that here instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yep, that's the todo above, I can make a PR
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yep, that's the todo above
Uuups 🤦
Thanks!
| .as_mut() | ||
| .map(|k| k.add_address(&peer_id, addr)); | ||
| if let Some(autonat) = self.swarm.behaviour_mut().autonat.as_mut() { | ||
| autonat.add_server(peer_id, Some(addr)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As mentioned elsewhere, using autonat::Config::use_connected might be good enough. Though adding them explicitly and thus knowing for sure that they support the autonat protocol is likely the better bet.
For the record, this would be simplified with libp2p/rust-libp2p#2680.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted to be sure 😅 so did both for now
| let transport = transport | ||
| .upgrade(core::upgrade::Version::V1Lazy) | ||
| .authenticate(auth_config) | ||
| .multiplex(mplex_config) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not related to this pull request, though very relevant in general, why use mplex and not yamux or both with a preference on yamux?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if you look a little above it is actually both mplex and yamux just the name is wrong 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Please keep prioritizing Yamux over Mplex.
| .boxed() | ||
| if config.relay_client { | ||
| let (relay_transport, relay_client) = | ||
| libp2p::relay::v2::client::Client::new_transport_and_behaviour( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hope the creation of the NetworkBehaviour and the Transport was OK to follow. Tried to make it impossible to missuse at compile time, likely at the expense of being easy to use.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yep, a little unfortunate to have to pass these around, but was quite clear from the types and the example, what needed to be done 👍
First indicators are good, suggesting an increase in addrs we are able to dial succesfully |
|
@mxinden currently there is no metrics implementation for |
refactor: make on_collection take a reference
libp2p::autonatlibp2p::dcutrandlibp2p::relay::v2Closes n0-computer/beetle#240