bug: @helia/block-brokers session do not propagate provider option for http trustless gateway

[vasco-santos]

I noticed while trying to use ?provider query parameter with @helia/verified-fetch that it does not get propagated to the block brokers, specifically to the trustless gateway in the same way as when one sets a gateway in the @helia/verified-fetch config. Resulting in basically being ignore.

This hack https://github.com/ipfs/helia/pull/815/files made it work for me, but I believe it may exist a better solution that I am not aware at the moment.

Thoughts @achingbrain

[achingbrain]

it does not get propagated to the block brokers

That's correct yes, for the time being anyway - it's not been exposed yet, thanks for the PR

[nitininhouse]

hey @achingbrain can i work on this issue !?

[gammazero]

Triage: blocked waiting for PR #833 and on https://github.com/ipfs/specs/pull/504

[lidel]

Triage notes:

• The request here is sensible for JS API (adding ability to pass extra providers to prewarm session or to provide fallback/backup ones obtained by other means)
• BUT
  • there is a wider context of https://github.com/ipfs/specs/pull/504
  • namely, my concerns from https://github.com/ipfs/specs/pull/504#discussion_r2132624223
  • This means, whatever JS API is added to facilitate this request it needs to allow caller to control if these extra providers are used "in parallel like every other provider" (option B from https://github.com/ipfs/specs/pull/504#discussion_r2132624223) or as fallback (option C)
• Why?
  • if JS API does not support control between (B) and (C), in the future, if ?provider is added, it may be added with unintended consequences described in https://github.com/ipfs/specs/pull/504#discussion_r2132624223