-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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.
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
Added backward argument to block headers request #1100
Conversation
Looks ok to me. LES uses the word |
I don't mind rewording to |
specs/networking/rpc-interface.md
Outdated
@@ -225,6 +225,7 @@ Requests a list of block roots and slots from the peer. The `count` parameter MU | |||
start_slot: uint64 | |||
max_headers: uint64 | |||
skip_slots: uint64 | |||
backward: uint8 in {0, 1} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be of type bool
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, semantically this is a bool
. Spec-wise though I didn't find any occurrences of bool
to date, and went kinda the same way it was done in eth1 wire spec. Should I change it to bool instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indeed. Changed to bool
closing in favor of #1281 |
The
backward
option is useful for obtaining the branches we're missing for some reason, but getting attestations to.