Zeto domain to support zeto tokens with anonymity and encryption #114
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
|
besides reconciling some of the moved types that were missed, I'm also sorting the domain config with the contract config. so moving this back to draft |
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
…te-lifecycle Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
solidity/contracts/domains/interfaces/IPaladinContractFactory.sol
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| type DomainFactoryConfig struct { | ||
| FactoryAddress string `json:"factoryAddress"` | ||
| Libraries map[string]string `json:"libraries"` | ||
| DomainContracts DomainConfigContracts `json:"domainContracts"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this factory config is something that ultimately all users would need to add into their Paladin config yaml.
I understand factory address and library addresses. But why do they need to do so much configuration of the domain contracts? It seems like only the deployer would need to know those details, and everyone else could receive them from the deploy event.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I haven't got to the behavior of a participating Paladin node yet, which I think should just need some subset of the configurations, the implementation contracts that they want to support. keeping the ABIs as a local configuration means it doesn't need to be sent with every transaction. the DomainConfig can just be the minimal information, which is just the token name (and the version). everything else needed for dealing with the transactions such as ABIs, circuit IDs, can all be obtained from the domain factory configuration, which needs to be constructed from a local configuration (to be added later).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK - I think we need to explicitly split what is actual "domain config" (which will ultimately be part of Paladin config) and what is "test config" (things like lists of contracts to load into the testbed). Anything that is "test config" should not be in pkg but somewhere in the test.
| bytes32 transactionId, | ||
| string memory tokenName, | ||
| address initialOwner, | ||
| bytes memory data |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I note that in #137 Peter moved toward calling this parameter "config" (instead of "data")... I think that might be a good idea.
| @@ -247,6 +247,7 @@ func (z *Zeto) FindCoins(ctx context.Context, query string) ([]*types.ZetoCoin, | |||
| if err != nil { | |||
| return nil, err | |||
| } | |||
| fmt.Printf("states: %+v\n", states) | |||
This reverts commit 59a7c13. Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
jimthematrix
force-pushed
the
domains-zeto
branch
from
a867457
to
9dc3ba5
Compare
awrichar
force-pushed
the
domains-zeto
branch
from
431efac
to
9dc3ba5
Compare
…ontract_V0 Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Reworked: Pente integration of EVM for full transactions end to end
Signed-off-by: Peter Broadhurst <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jim Zhang <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left a few comments that haven't yet been addressed - at least these:
https://github.com/kaleido-io/paladin/pull/114/files#r1757345044
https://github.com/kaleido-io/paladin/pull/114/files#r1757350587
https://github.com/kaleido-io/paladin/pull/114/files#r1757348822
But overall this looks very good. None of the above are blocking, if it's more convenient to merge and address in follow-ups.
The Zeto domain implementation has been updated to handle two variations: anonymity and encryption. Variations using nullifiers will come in a separate PR as that'll need significant work.
A
local configurationhas been introduced that will work with the "onchain" domain config which gets published by the deploy transaction. Using the token name from the onchain domain config, the domain can look up the supporting materials from the local configuration (contract ABIs, circuit runtimes and proving keys etc.) to process transaction requests for the token implementation.The e2e test is split out into a separate package
integration-testso that it's clear what are the things being done inside the domain vs. outside.Add Zeto domain contract deployment for the e2e tests, based on a convenient yaml based configuration. Proper contract deployment and upgrade management is outside of the scope of the Paladin runtime. The domain contract deployment discovers the declared contracts to deploy, and builds the order to deploy based on dependencies.
The domain instance address detection in the core event indexer is enhanced to allow events emitted by the factory with the instance address, to avoid requiring all implementation contracts to be wrapped for Paladin's consumption.