Skip to content
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

feat: expose an API suitable for NI-PoRep proof aggregation #1757

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 17, 2024

Conversation

cryptonemo
Copy link
Collaborator

feat: add tests to ensure NI-PoRep is tested w and w/o aggregation

feat: add tests to ensure NI-PoRep is tested w and w/o aggregation
Copy link
Contributor

@DrPeterVanNostrand DrPeterVanNostrand left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me, I just have a couple optional questions/comments.

filecoin-proofs/tests/api.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@vmx vmx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just making sure I understand correctly what this is about. In the last step of the Ni-PoRep we aggregate the proofs. We cannot aggregate aggregated proofs. Hence if we want to aggregate several Ni-PoReps, we need the unaggregated result and then aggregate all of them. Is that correct?

filecoin-proofs/tests/api.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
filecoin-proofs/tests/api.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
@cryptonemo
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Just making sure I understand correctly what this is about. In the last step of the Ni-PoRep we aggregate the proofs. We cannot aggregate aggregated proofs. Hence if we want to aggregate several Ni-PoReps, we need the unaggregated result and then aggregate all of them. Is that correct?

Correct, it's specified in the FIP, but wasn't in the implementation. Fortunately it was caught before shipping.

@cryptonemo cryptonemo merged commit 51c7a79 into master May 17, 2024
32 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants