Remove `without_storage_info` for the `node-authorization` pallet
Part of https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/issues/8629
This PR changes the logic in the following way:
- The well known nodes inserted during genesis are now bound by the
MaxPeerIdLengthandMaxWellKnownNodesconstants. (Previously this wasn't enforced.) - The
reset_well_known_nodesnow enforces that the peer IDs passed in thenodesare bound byMaxPeerIdLength. (Previously this wasn't enforced.) - The
reset_well_known_nodesnow enforces that the number of nodes is bound by exactlyMaxWellKnownNodes. (Previously it enforced a limit ofMaxWellKnownNodes - 1, which I assume was an off-by-one error?) - The set inside of the
AdditionalConnectionsis now bound by theMaxAdditionalConnectionsconstant. (Previously it was uncapped.) - The
add_connectionsandremove_connectionsnow enforce that the peer IDs passed in theconnectionsare bound byMaxPeerIdLength. (Previously this wasn't enforced.) - The
offchain_workerhook now enforces that thestate.peer_idis now at mostMaxPeerIdLengthlong. (Previously this wasn't enforced.)
Marking as D5-nicetohaveaudit since this does change the logic.
Since this enforces extra bounds which weren't previously enforced do we need to do anything extra here?
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
not stale
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
not stale
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
not stale
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
not stale
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
not stale
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
Hey, is anyone still working on this? Due to the inactivity this issue has been automatically marked as stale. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@koute do you feel like taking this over again? We will review it 😇
@koute do you feel like taking this over again? We will review it
Sure I can. Could I get some feedback as to how this should be done? Is the way I did it okay, or does anything else has to change? (Besides @ggwpez 's comments which I'll address.)
I think this is pretty much ready. @ggwpez I loop you in as you are more familiar with it to answer koute