Technical Working Group: Inter-canister Event Utility Working Group

General
18

Event Working Group Meeting Notes

Date: 20240417

Attendees:

  • Austin Fatheree
  • Ilia Agafonov
  • Ethan Celletti
  • Matt
  • Lachlan Witham
  • Zhenya Usenko

Agenda and Discussion Points:

  1. Token Vote:

    • The group agreed to ratify the first token mint based on the discussion in GitHub Issue #12.

  2. Formalize WG Member List and Role Assignment:

    • Decision: Formal WG member list will be used. Members can join by asking, and roles will be assigned liberally unless there is a consensus to limit a role.
    • Specific Roles Discussed:
      • Austin Fatheree: Thought Leader, Voting Member
        • Assignment: Create weekly meeting agenda.
      • Roles Defined:
        • Thought Leader: Review issues, provide proactive responses, and insight.
        • Voting Member: Vote on “Vote Required” GitHub issues.
        • Secretary: Responsible for recording meetings, producing notes, and providing attendance.
    • Austin will brainstorm a more formal list of roles.

  3. Issue Review:

    • Issue #2 - Two Types of Subscriber Approach:

      • General consensus reached; raised by Ilia. Discussion focused on systems requiring trusted responses, especially in smaller systems or those dealing only with trusted canisters.

      • Austin asked about the type of response, leading to a decision on using open metadata so systems can implement ICRC16/Value, ensuring that the response from trusted endpoints should only include metadata, not rich stateful data.

      • We have general consensus.

  icrcx_event_listener : (event: Event) -> async (); //untrusted
  icrcx_event_listener_trusted : (event: Event) -> async (opt Value);  //#Map for maps, #Nat for ID.

Presupposition: The trusted return type should only include response metadata and typically not have rich, stateful data.(emit your own event if you want to talk back to a publisher).

  1. Issue #3 - Message Identifier Discussion:
    • Raised by Austin, discussion on whether to use variants for message identifiers and the necessity of size checking if using a ‘nat’.
    • Consensus on broadcaster needing to validate message size.
    • Group ready to vote on at least using nats for message identifiers, and Previous Message optional.
    • Notification ID will be moved to a different Issue
  2. Ilia’s Pull Request:
    • Update on the name in the draft related to event identifiers. (Make sure it has Events in it … see Pull Request 1).

Action Items:

  • Austin Fatheree: Create Votes for Issue 2 and 3
  • Austin Fatheree: Create Role list
  • Group: Continue to create new issues and address existing issues
2 Likes