-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 217
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
[Proposal] ENSIP-17: DataURI Format in Contenthash #165
Conversation
Thanks for submitting this! It's nice to see expanded standardisation of this, and I like the novel combination of CCIP read and contenthash. However, contenthash is a binary field, as defined here: https://docs.ens.domains/ens-improvement-proposals/ensip-7-contenthash-field
This spec will need to be updated to either use an existing multicodec type to encode the data, or to use a newly defined one. |
We were initially looking to use
But we're eventually deviating from multicodec on this to feature a default/fallback profile implemented in some JS code e.g.
We can request to add |
The problem with this is that it directly contradicts ENSIP-7, as quoted above. Contenthashes must be valid multicodec values. We're not going to standardise something that contradicts an earlier standard like this. |
This is a copy of the response posted in the ENS Forum. Thanks for the feedback! We have looked into possible ways for this draft ENSIP to be compatible with multicodec. These are our findings in form of different implementations with and without multicodec. We are open to either implementation in the end and update this draft ENSIP as required. A) Bypass Multicodec:First, we'd like to point to the current state of import {encode, decode } from "@ensdomains/content-hash";
console.log(encode("data:text/plain;base64,SGVsbG8gV29ybGQ"))
//> 00000000000000000000
console.log(decode("646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751"))
//> ata:text/plain;base64,SGVsbG8gV29ybGQ The extra console.log(decode("00646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751"))
//> data:text/plain;base64,SGVsbG8gV29ybGQ
This will bypass multicodec for DataURIs in Contenthash. ✅ This is our preferred implementation but we are not married to it. B) Multicodec Compatible FormatsIf multicodec must be used, then we'd like to propose the following options: 1)
|
Namespace | Version | Multiaddr | Multihash | Length | Data |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ipfs |
1 |
raw |
identity |
38 |
data:text/plain;base64,SGVsbG8gV29ybGQ |
0xe301 |
0x01 |
0x55 |
0x00 |
0x26 |
0x646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751 |
CID Inspector : https://cid.ipfs.tech/#bafkqajtemf2gcotumv4hil3qnrqws3r3mjqxgzjwgqwfgr2wonreoodhkyzds6lci5iq
Public Gateway : https://ipfs.io/ipfs/bafkqajtemf2gcotumv4hil3qnrqws3r3mjqxgzjwgqwfgr2wonreoodhkyzds6lci5iq
Since this method uses IPFS namespace, ens/content-hash.js
and any compatible gateway or client must check if the encoded payload is using raw
as multicodec with identity
(blank
) as multihash; the shorthand prefix for this is 0xe301015500
. Clients can decode the remaining raw data as utf-8
string; if this data is not data:uri
formatted, it should be auto-rendered as plaintext
for correctly formatted data:uri
clients, and gateways can render according to mime or type included in the DataURI payload.
2) plaintextv2
data with IPFS or IPLD namespace
:
This is similar to the previous option but using plaintextv2
instead of raw
as multicodec.
import { CID } from 'multiformats/cid'
import { identity } from 'multiformats/hashes/identity'
const utf8 = new TextEncoder();
let data = utf8.encode('data:text/plain;base64,SGVsbG8gV29ybGQ');
let cid = CID.create(1, 0x706c61, await identity.digest(data))
plaintextv2
format using IPFS namespace
Base32 : bahq5rqidaatgiylume5hizlyoqxxa3dbnfxdwytbonstmnbmkndvm43ci44govrshf4wer2r
Base16 : f01e1d8c1030026646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751
Contenthash :
0xe30101e1d8c1030026646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751
|Namespace|Version|Multiaddr|Multihash|Length|Data|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|ipfs
|1
|plaintextv2``identity
|38
|data:text/plain;base64,SGVsbG8gV29ybGQ
|
|0xe301
|0x01
|0xe1d8c103
|0x00
|0x26
|0x646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751
|
CID Inspector : https://cid.ipfs.tech/#bahq5rqidaatgiylume5hizlyoqxxa3dbnfxdwytbonstmnbmkndvm43ci44govrshf4wer2r
Public Gateway : https://ipfs.io/ipfs/bahq5rqidaatgiylume5hizlyoqxxa3dbnfxdwytbonstmnbmkndvm43ci44govrshf4wer2rh
plaintextv2
format using IPLD namespace
Base32 : bahq5rqidaatgiylume5hizlyoqxxa3dbnfxdwytbonstmnbmkndvm43ci44govrshf4wer2r
Base16 : f01e1d8c1030026646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751
Contenthash :
0xe20101e1d8c1030026646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751
Namespace | Version | Multiaddr | Multihash | Length | Data |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ipld |
1 |
plaintextv2 |
identity |
38 |
data:text/plain;base64,SGVsbG8gV29ybGQ |
0xe201 |
0x01 |
0xe1d8c103 |
0x00 |
0x26 |
0x646174613a746578742f706c61696e3b6261736536342c534756736247386756323979624751 |
CID Inspector : https://cid.ipfs.tech/#bahq5rqidaatgiylume5hizlyoqxxa3dbnfxdwytbonstmnbmkndvm43ci44govrshf4wer2r
Public Gateway : https://dweb.link/api/v0/dag/get?arg=bahq5rqidaatgiylume5hizlyoqxxa3dbnfxdwytbonstmnbmkndvm43ci44govrshf4wer2r
❗ NOTE: plaintextv2
is still in draft and IPFS gateways CANNOT yet render it properly resulting in 500 error. Trying to use it as IPLD might require changing the encoding process too. We do not prefer this method.
C) CARv1
strings
CARv1
files as strings can represent IPFS data or IPLD files and directory but this implementation is more complex than previous options so we'll only mention this as a footnote. We don't have the bandwidth to implement this. If ENS devs are happy to explore this for future implementation, it'll be one of best options for fully on- or off-chain generators and IPFS data storage.
Based on this, we are happy to get more feedback and then make changes to the draft ENSIP!
I'm confused why IPFS is involved at all. Why can't you either use an existing multicodec identifier or define a new one for URIs? |
We had thought about the option of a new namespace in our draft but we skipped it since IPFS/IPLD namespace with plaintext or raw encoded payload contained within the CID is sufficiently unique, and backwards compatible with IPFS gateways returning plaintext data.
However, we're open to requesting a new ENS-specific namespace for this ENSIP only. In this regard, please suggest a short code (>=2 bytes) for this and we'll PR that in the multicodec table soon. Something like
The above two options with
Please suggest us more options other than these two! There are currently no DataURI-related multiaddr or namespaces and we do not want to introduce one in this context due to lack of manpower and funding to follow up on sidequests. DataURI class is too broad and it'll also require mime/type codecs which are pending on issues or PR for a very long time. See below: |
This proposed extension to ENSIP-07 introduces
data:uri
format in ENS Contenthash field, allowing dynamic data streaming using EIP-3668: CCIP-Read and ENSIP-10: Wildcard Resolution. Please feel free to go through the draft and ask any questions, seek clarifications, give suggestions or propose edits.