You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently we keep track of the IpAddr of connected peers. The new API endpoint wants addresses for each peer in a multiaddr form. Although we can use the ENR, sometimes this will be out of date and sometimes non-existent.
The best source of truth is to use the address that we see the peer connect to us on. That is what seen_address stores. However it currently only stores the IP address. If we also store the port, then we can construct a more valid multiaddr for the HTTP API.
In essence we need to update the seen_address field in the PeerInfo struct to store SocketAddrs.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
## Issue Addressed
`node` endpoints in #1434
## Proposed Changes
Implement these:
```
/eth/v1/node/health
/eth/v1/node/peers/{peer_id}
/eth/v1/node/peers
```
- Add an `Option<Enr>` to `PeerInfo`
- Finish implementation of `/eth/v1/node/identity`
## Additional Info
- should update the `peers` endpoints when #1764 is resolved
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <[email protected]>
Description
Currently we keep track of the
IpAddr
of connected peers. The new API endpoint wants addresses for each peer in a multiaddr form. Although we can use the ENR, sometimes this will be out of date and sometimes non-existent.The best source of truth is to use the address that we see the peer connect to us on. That is what
seen_address
stores. However it currently only stores the IP address. If we also store the port, then we can construct a more valid multiaddr for the HTTP API.In essence we need to update the
seen_address
field in thePeerInfo
struct to storeSocketAddr
s.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: