Conversation
Added a comment to clarify onchain decryption requirements.
joyqvq
commented
Feb 26, 2026
| // Approvals count not reached, return key server back to old committee. | ||
| if (approvals.length() != committee.members.length()) { | ||
| dof::add<ID, KeyServer>(&mut old_committee.id, old_committee_id, key_server); | ||
| // TODO: just making sure - is that safe to reshare it again and again? |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
manos and reginaldo mentions that as long as it doesnt error when called in testnet, it means its fine, its probably because the version is incremented. but cc @rjs-mysten will double check this pattern since it comes as a surprise.
joyqvq
commented
Feb 26, 2026
| /// Create a key server object with df of KeyServerV2 of committee server type. | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: should be private entry so we can remove it in the future? | ||
| public fun create_committee_v2( |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this needs to be called by the committee pkg. it has to be public not entry right?
joyqvq
commented
Feb 26, 2026
joyqvq
commented
Feb 26, 2026
| /// Upgrade the current key server's to v2 by adding a df to KeyServerV2, still a single owner object. | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: should be private entry so we can remove it in the future? | ||
| // TODO: how would future upgrades from v2 to v3 would look like with the committee? (e.g., if there is a bug that requires a new version) |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- add a public func to upgrade v2 to v3
- delete func create_v2,
- upgrade seal
- ask committee that depends on it to upgrade?
joyqvq
commented
Mar 2, 2026
joyqvq
commented
Mar 2, 2026
| // - Rotation: only continuing members create a message (my_old_share is Some). | ||
| let my_message = if old_threshold.is_none() || my_old_share.is_some() { | ||
| println!("Creating DKG message for party {my_party_id}..."); | ||
| // TODO: every message should use unique RO, let's use (DOMAIN_SEP, committee_id, party id) |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://github.com/MystenLabs/fastcrypto/blob/main/fastcrypto-tbls/src/dkg_v1.rs#L170 this says RO should be the same for all parties?
joyqvq
commented
Mar 2, 2026
joyqvq
commented
Mar 2, 2026
Collaborator
Author
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Describe the changes or additions included in this PR.
Test plan
How did you test the new or updated feature?