/
lip-0068.md
247 lines (189 loc) · 12.9 KB
/
lip-0068.md
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
```
LIP: 0068
Title: Define new transaction schema
Author: Grigorios Koumoutsos <grigorios.koumoutsos@lightcurve.io>
Maxime Gagnebin <maxime.gagnebin@lightcurve.io>
Discussions-To: https://research.lisk.com/t/define-new-transaction-schema/348/15
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Created: 2022-05-31
Updated: 2022-09-01
```
## Abstract
This LIP defines a new schema to be used to serialize transactions. The main change is to replace module and command identifiers by the corresponding names, which are of type string. This LIP also updates the terminology used for transaction and transaction properties.
## Copyright
This LIP is licensed under the [Creative Commons Zero 1.0 Universal](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/).
## Motivation
The Lisk protocol handles identifiers for transactions, modules, commands, and many more. In many of those cases such as modules and commands there is also a name property, which is of type string and is set to some intuitive value (e.g., "token" module, "transfer" command). In the current protocol, such objects are referenced using their identifiers and their names have an auxiliary role. This is not so convenient for users and developers, since they have to memorize the (non-intuitive) identifier values. Merging those two properties and identifying modules and commands using their name provides a much better user/developer experience.
## Rationale
### Simplifying Identification
The type identifiers in the Lisk protocol are of type `uint32` or of type `bytes`. In both cases, they are set to a non-intuitive value which has to be memorized by users and developers. As the ecosystem grows and more functionalities are added, especially with the intoduction of interoperability, the number of values that have to be memorized gets quite large, making the identification system quite impractical (and potentially error-prone). On the other hand, for each component (modules, commands, events, etc.) there is a much more intuitive parameter: its name. Switching identifiers to those names (and removing the old identifiers) makes the whole user and developer experience easier and less error-prone.
Therefore, for the cases where removing the old identifiers does not introduce any significant challenge in the ecosystem, it is plausible to proceed to this switch and use names as identifiers. This is the case for modules, commands and events.
### Changes Compared to LIP 0028
The previous transaction schema was defined in [LIP 0028][lip-0028]. Here we define the following changes:
**New property names:** All properties in the proposed transaction schema are equivalent to the ones defined in [LIP 0028][lip-0028]. The only changes are the replacement of identifiers by the corresponding names and the update of terminology according to the [LIP 0069][lip-0069] (renaming a module asset to a command and a transaction `asset` property to `params`). Overall, `moduleID` is replaced by `module`, `assetID` is replaced by `command` and `asset` is renamed to `params`.
**Serialization/Deserialization:** Serialization and deserialization follow the same specifications already defined in [LIP 0028][lip-0028]; the resulting serialization is however different when the proposed transaction schema is used, due to the change of types for identifiers for module and command. For completeness we include the pseudocode [below](#serialization). The transaction ID is calculated in the same way as described in [LIP 0028][lip-0028] (the SHA-256 hash of the serialized transaction object).
**Signature Calculation:** The signature calculation function defined in [LIP 0028][lip-0028#signature-calculation] is updated to incorporate message tags introduced in [LIP 0037][lip-0037].
## Specification
The transaction schema defined in [LIP 0028][lip-0028] is superseded by the one defined [below](#json-schema).
The `params` property must follow the schema corresponding to the (`module`, `command`) pair defined in the corresponding module; we call this schema `paramsSchema`.
### Constants
| Name | Type | Value | Description |
|------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
| **Global Constants** | | | |
| `ED25519_PUBLIC_KEY_LENGTH` | uint32 | 32 | The length of public keys. |
| `ED25519_PRIVATE_KEY_LENGTH` | uint32 | 32 | The length of private keys. |
| `ED25519_SIGNATURE_LENGTH` | uint32 | 64 | The length of signatures. |
| `MESSAGE_TAG_TRANSACTION` | bytes | "LSK_TX_" as ASCII-encoded literal | Message tag for transaction signatures (see [LIP 0037](lip-0037)). |
| `MIN_MODULE_NAME_LENGTH` | uint32 | 1 | The minimum length of a string specifying the name of a module. |
| `MAX_MODULE_NAME_LENGTH` | uint32 | 32 | The maximum length of a string specifying the name of a module |
| `MIN_COMMAND_NAME_LENGTH` | uint32 | 1 | The minimum length of a string specifying the name of a command. |
| `MAX_COMMAND_NAME_LENGTH` | uint32 | 32 | The maximum length of a string specifying the name of a command. |
| **Configurable Constants** | | **Mainchain Value** | |
| `MAX_PARAMS_SIZE` | uint32 | 14 KiB (14*1024 bytes) | The maximum allowed length of the transaction parameters. |
### Type Definition
| Name | Type | Validation | Description |
|---------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| `SignatureEd25519` | bytes | Must be of length `ED25519_SIGNATURE_LENGTH`. | Used for Ed25519 signatures. |
| `PrivateKeyEd25519` | bytes | Must be of length `ED25519_PRIVATE_KEY_LENGTH`. | Used for Ed25519 private keys. |
| `Transaction` | object | Must follow the `transactionSchema` schema with the only difference that `params` property is not serialized and contains the values of parameters of `paramsSchema` for the corresponding transaction. | An object representing a non-serialized transaction. |
### JSON Schema
Transactions are serialized using `transactionSchema` given below.
```java
transactionSchema = {
"type": "object",
"required": [
"module",
"command",
"nonce",
"fee",
"senderPublicKey",
"params",
"signatures"
],
"properties": {
"module": {
"dataType": "string",
"minLength": MIN_MODULE_NAME_LENGTH,
"maxLength": MAX_MODULE_NAME_LENGTH,
"fieldNumber": 1
},
"command": {
"dataType": "string",
"minLength": MIN_COMMAND_NAME_LENGTH,
"maxLength": MAX_COMMAND_NAME_LENGTH,
"fieldNumber": 2
},
"nonce": {
"dataType": "uint64",
"fieldNumber": 3
},
"fee": {
"dataType": "uint64",
"fieldNumber": 4
},
"senderPublicKey": {
"dataType": "bytes",
"length": ED25519_PUBLIC_KEY_LENGTH,
"fieldNumber": 5
},
"params": {
"dataType": "bytes",
"fieldNumber": 6
},
"signatures": {
"dataType": "array",
"items": {
"dataType": "bytes",
"length": ED25519_SIGNATURE_LENGTH
},
"fieldNumber": 7
}
}
}
```
#### Validation
For a transaction `trs` to be valid, it must satisfy the following:
* `trs` must follow the `transactionSchema`.
* `trs.params` is of length less than or equal to `MAX_PARAMS_SIZE`.
* `trs.module` is an alphanumeric string, i.e., matches the regular expression `"^[a-zA-Z0-9]*$"`.
* `trs.command` is an alphanumeric string, i.e., matches the regular expression `"^[a-zA-Z0-9]*$"`.
These checks are performed in the [static validation stage][lip-0055#block-processing] of the block processing.
### Serialization
The serialization of an object of type `Transaction` is described in the following pseudocode.
```python
def encodeTransaction(trs: Transaction) -> bytes:
paramsSchema = JSON schema corresponding to (trs.module, trs.command) pair
trs.params = encode(paramsSchema,trs.params)
return encode(transactionSchema,trs)
```
### Deserialization
Consider a binary message `trsMsg`, corresponding to a serialized transaction. The deserialization procedure is as follows:
```python
def decodeTransaction(trsMsg: bytes) -> Transaction:
trsData = decode(transactionSchema,trsMsg)
paramsSchema = JSON schema corresponding to (trsData.module, trsData.command) pair
trsData.params = decode(paramsSchema,trsData.params)
return trsData
```
### Transaction Signature Calculation
The following function calculates the signature with secret key `sk` of a transaction `trs` for a chain identified by the given [chainID](https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0037.md#chain-identifiers).
```python
def computeTransactionSignature(sk: PrivateKeyEd25519, trs: Transaction, chainID: bytes) -> SignatureEd25519:
trs.signatures = []
serializedTrs = encodeTransaction(trs)
return signEd25519(sk, MESSAGE_TAG_TRANSACTION, chainID, serializedTrs)
```
By convention, the `signatures` property of the transaction object that is signed is required to be the empty array and therefore this property is set accordingly. Further note that the function `signEd25519` is defined in [LIP 0037](https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0037.md#signing-and-verifying-with-ed25519).
### Transaction Signature Validation
Signature validation is done using the `verifySignatures` function defined in [LIP 0041](https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0041.md#transaction-verification) with the input parameter `tag` equal to `MESSAGE_TAG_TRANSACTION`.
## Backwards Compatibility
This LIP results in a hard fork as nodes following the proposed protocol will reject transactions following the previous schema, and nodes following the previous protocol will reject transactions following the proposed schema.
## Reference Implementation
TBD
## Appendix
In this section, we present a serialization example for a transfer transaction. To calculate the signature, we use the chain identifier: `chainID = 0x00000000` and the tag: `tag = "LSK_TX_".encode()`.
#### **Transaction object to serialize:**
```java
myTrs = {
"module": "token",
"command": "transfer",
"nonce": "5",
"fee": "1216299416",
"senderPublicKey": "6689d38d0d89e072b5339d24b4bff1bd6ef99eb26d8e02697819aecc8851fd55",
"params": {
"tokenID": "0000000000000000",
"amount": "123986407700",
"recipientAddress": "2ca4b4e9924547c48c04300b320be84e8cd81e4a",
"data": "Odi et amo. Quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.",
"accountInitializationFee": "0"
},
"signatures": [
'7d99f9c16dfb65f68380c20920ebe61f78d34d36d4aa9f329579b52cd15adef37cc82eddd6ae64c68b0ca856eaba66086435225879c3babb55dcd98da8f68a01',
'2fd50abd1eb0543f20386e522282288fd7c30e435804f9ac35e25fc203b319fbb90ac90c7265197a8fec4b6b67b930d036e89caa1e96a01680c014cbbfd5e009'
]
}
```
#### **Binary message without signatures (151 bytes):**
```
0a05746f6b656e12087472616e736665721805209883fdc3042a206689d38d0d89e072b5339d24b4bff1bd6ef99eb26d8e02697819aecc8851fd55325a0a0800000000000000001094e2a9f1cd031a142ca4b4e9924547c48c04300b320be84e8cd81e4a222f4f646920657420616d6f2e2051756172652069642066616369616d2c20666f7274617373652072657175697269732e2800
```
#### **Transaction ID:**
```
96f439242b9514ab8b8aa6c422283976ce811457429f4b13ac1a5380ef3c88b5
```
#### **First key pair:**
```
private key = 42d93fa53d631181540ad630b9ad913835db79e7d2510be915513836bc175edc
public key = 6689d38d0d89e072b5339d24b4bff1bd6ef99eb26d8e02697819aecc8851fd55
```
#### **Second key pair:**
```
private key = 3751d0dee5ee214809118514303fa50a1daaf7151ec8d30c98b12e0caa4bb7de
public key = aa3f553d66b58d6167d14fe9e91b1bd04d7cf5eef27fed0bec8aaac6c73c90b3
```
[lip-0028]: https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0028.md
[lip-0028#signature-calculation]: https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0028.md#transaction-signature-calculation
[lip-0037]: https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0037.md
[lip-0055#block-processing]: https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0055.md#block-processing-stages
[lip-0069]: https://github.com/LiskHQ/lips/blob/main/proposals/lip-0069.md