It seems the semantic differences between addFoundNode and addInboundNode were lost in
#29572. My understanding is addFoundNode is for a node you have not contacted directly
(and are unsure if is available) whereas addInboundNode is for adding nodes that have
contacted the local node and we can verify they are active.
handleAddNode seems to be the consolidation of those two methods, yet it bumps the node in
the bucket (updating it's IP addr) even if the node was not an inbound. This PR fixes
this. It wasn't originally caught in tests like TestTable_addSeenNode because the
manipulation of the node object actually modified the node value used by the test.
New logic is added to reject non-inbound updates unless the sequence number of the
(signed) ENR increases. Inbound updates, which are published by the updated node itself,
are always accepted. If an inbound update changes the endpoint, the node will be
revalidated on an expedited schedule.
Co-authored-by: Felix Lange <fjl@twurst.com>
In #29572, I assumed the revalidation list that the node is contained in could only ever
be changed by the outcome of a revalidation request. But turns out that's not true: if the
node gets removed due to FINDNODE failure, it will also be removed from the list it is in.
This causes a crash.
The invariant is: while node is in table, it is always in exactly one of the two lists. So
it seems best to store a pointer to the current list within the node itself.
enode.Node has separate accessor functions for getting the IP, UDP port and TCP port.
These methods performed separate checks for attributes set in the ENR.
With this PR, the accessor methods will now return cached information, and the endpoint is
determined when the node is created. The logic to determine the preferred endpoint is now
more correct, and considers how 'global' each address is when both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses
are present in the ENR.
Node discovery periodically revalidates the nodes in its table by sending PING, checking
if they are still alive. I recently noticed some issues with the implementation of this
process, which can cause strange results such as nodes dropping unexpectedly, certain
nodes not getting revalidated often enough, and bad results being returned to incoming
FINDNODE queries.
In this change, the revalidation process is improved with the following logic:
- We maintain two 'revalidation lists' containing the table nodes, named 'fast' and 'slow'.
- The process chooses random nodes from each list on a randomized interval, the interval being
faster for the 'fast' list, and performs revalidation for the chosen node.
- Whenever a node is newly inserted into the table, it goes into the 'fast' list.
Once validation passes, it transfers to the 'slow' list. If a request fails, or the
node changes endpoint, it transfers back into 'fast'.
- livenessChecks is incremented by one for successful checks. Unlike the old implementation,
we will not drop the node on the first failing check. We instead quickly decay the
livenessChecks give it another chance.
- Order of nodes in bucket doesn't matter anymore.
I am also adding a debug API endpoint to dump the node table content.
Co-authored-by: Martin HS <martin@swende.se>
time.After is equivalent to NewTimer(d).C, and does not call Stop if the timer is no longer needed. This can cause memory leaks. This change changes many such occations to use NewTimer instead, and calling Stop once the timer is no longer needed.
Since Go 1.22 has deprecated certain elliptic curve operations, this PR removes
references to the affected functions and replaces them with a custom implementation
in package crypto. This causes backwards-incompatible changes in some places.
---------
Co-authored-by: Marius van der Wijden <m.vanderwijden@live.de>
Co-authored-by: Felix Lange <fjl@twurst.com>
Since Go 1.22 has deprecated certain elliptic curve operations, this PR removes
references to the affected functions and replaces them with a custom implementation
in package crypto. This causes backwards-incompatible changes in some places.
---------
Co-authored-by: Marius van der Wijden <m.vanderwijden@live.de>
Co-authored-by: Felix Lange <fjl@twurst.com>
