-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Nothing to hold TS to account #41
Comments
Discussed with @SteveLasker and @OR13, the most useful step in that direction would be to specify a stand-alone consistency proof format, at which point it would make sense to have an API allowing a client to request a consistency proof from a point to another point in a ledger history. |
@achamayou / @JAG-UK would an api which responded with the VDS appropriate proof type work ? https://github.com/cose-wg/draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs sais "COSE Receipts" but it actually allows a VDS to define any proof format that it deems relevant. Two tricky aspects I see:
|
I think it would?
That sounds similar to the situation for proofs of inclusion, which may also be behind an async API because the ledger needs to do something that takes a bit of time first (replicate across N nodes etc).
Yes, that seems like the main obstacle to me. I don't know if this could be resolved by defining an (ordered, but opaque) transaction ID, and if |
Would be good to have an API that allows checking or proving consistency of the log.
We understand that not every log supports consistency proofs but in the cases where they do, there should be standard way to get them
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: