Date   

Re: Is HLF a DLT or a blockchain?

greg m
 

‘Altar of Proof of Work’ seems to be the biggest sticking point for all the definitions and it echoes “bitcoin maximalism”. In my mind, Linux Foundation, have made so much investment into the blockchain phenomenon, that for the member companies there is no going back even if they end up not calling it DLT, but something else – a sign of changing DT environments.

 

My 2 cents and not meant to start a flame.

 

Thank you, greg

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Brian Behlendorf
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2020 4:22 AM
To: fabric@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Is HLF a DLT or a blockchain?

 

Let's not get too hung up on terminology in such a charged environment. Don't take this as an "official statement".

Yes, Fabric's underlying data structure involves a string of blocks, chained together, cryptographically signed and linked, and similar in spirit (if not exact approach) to Satoshi's use of the term in the Bitcoin white paper. Some would say you can't even whisper Satoshi's name let alone use the term "blockchain" without bowing down at the alter of Proof of Work, but I think most feel that ship has sailed.

Yes, it would also not in inaccurate to describe the resulting system you build with Fabric as a "distributed ledger", distributed amongst the peers on the system (more precisely, on the same channel), with referential integrity and transactional characteristics worthy of the accounting term "ledger".

Now it might be a good idea to make sure Fabric docs use the terms consistently, just for clarity's sake.  But one can use both terms around Fabric without conflict.

Brian

 

On 1/24/20 7:45 PM, Trevor Lee Oakley wrote:

 

I see conflicting references to this. The docs refer to a DLT and also a blockchain. In 4.5.1 of the docs it states it is a blockchain but in other parts it states it is a DLT. I have seen countless references to both. 

 

Is there any official statement from the Linux Foundation about this?

 

 

Trevor

 

-- 
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director, Hyperledger
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf

 


Re: Is HLF a DLT or a blockchain?

Brian Behlendorf <bbehlendorf@...>
 

Let's not get too hung up on terminology in such a charged environment. Don't take this as an "official statement".

Yes, Fabric's underlying data structure involves a string of blocks, chained together, cryptographically signed and linked, and similar in spirit (if not exact approach) to Satoshi's use of the term in the Bitcoin white paper. Some would say you can't even whisper Satoshi's name let alone use the term "blockchain" without bowing down at the alter of Proof of Work, but I think most feel that ship has sailed.

Yes, it would also not in inaccurate to describe the resulting system you build with Fabric as a "distributed ledger", distributed amongst the peers on the system (more precisely, on the same channel), with referential integrity and transactional characteristics worthy of the accounting term "ledger".

Now it might be a good idea to make sure Fabric docs use the terms consistently, just for clarity's sake.  But one can use both terms around Fabric without conflict.

Brian


On 1/24/20 7:45 PM, Trevor Lee Oakley wrote:
 
I see conflicting references to this. The docs refer to a DLT and also a blockchain. In 4.5.1 of the docs it states it is a blockchain but in other parts it states it is a DLT. I have seen countless references to both. 
 
Is there any official statement from the Linux Foundation about this?
 
 
Trevor


-- 
Brian Behlendorf
Executive Director, Hyperledger
bbehlendorf@...
Twitter: @brianbehlendorf


Is HLF a DLT or a blockchain?

Trevor Lee Oakley <trevor@...>
 

 
I see conflicting references to this. The docs refer to a DLT and also a blockchain. In 4.5.1 of the docs it states it is a blockchain but in other parts it states it is a DLT. I have seen countless references to both. 
 
Is there any official statement from the Linux Foundation about this?
 
 
Trevor


Re: [i18n] Status report on translation of Fabric docs

Pam Andrejko
 

Yang,
Thanks for posting this update. The transition of Fabric from Gerrit to GitHub certainly facilitates this process making it easier to add the translations. There's alot of  good translation work that has already been done by the team so we are well positioned now to use that with the process you are proposing. 

I agree that creating the new Fabric-i18n repo with folders for each language is straightforward and should be easy to manage.

Thank you for putting together this proposal and we look forward to sharing more on one of the Contributors Calls.

~Pam




Re: what is the difference between system channel and application channel?

Yacov
 

the system channel is a channel that is available only on ordering service nodes, and it is simply used to synchronize application channel creation.

All transactions on the system channel are either configuration transactions, or transactions that create new channels.



From:        "Siddharth Jain" <siddjain@...>
To:        "fabric@..." <fabric@...>
Date:        01/24/2020 07:31 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] what is the difference between system channel and application channel?
Sent by:        fabric@...




Hello

Is there any document explaining what is the difference between system channel and application channel in Fabric?

Sid




what is the difference between system channel and application channel?

Siddharth Jain
 

Hello

Is there any document explaining what is the difference between system channel and application channel in Fabric?

Sid


Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Western hemisphere - Fri, 01/24/2020 #cal-notice

fabric@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Western hemisphere

When:
Friday, 24 January 2020
4:00pm to 5:00pm
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/6223336701

Organizer:
a_o-dowd@... +441962816761

Description:
Documentation workgroup call.
Agenda, minutes and recordings :https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/fabric/Documentation+Working+Group


Re: Chaincode Upgrade Docker Container Environment

Kimheng SOK
 

Thank you

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:36 PM Brett T Logan <Brett.T.Logan@...> wrote:
In core.yaml you can specify your own chaincode runtime image for golang, Java or Node. So you can extend the image to include your tools, publish the image to a Docker registry and then use that as the runtime in your core.yaml:
 
 
 
Brett Logan
Software Engineer, IBM Blockchain
Phone: 1-984-242-6890
 
 
 
----- Original message -----
From: "Kimheng SOK" <sok.kimheng@...>
Sent by: fabric@...
To: hyperledger-fabric@...
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Chaincode Upgrade Docker Container Environment
Date: Fri, Jan 24, 2020 10:17 AM
 
Dear all,
 
I have one question, each time we upgrade our chaincode a new docker container is created. 
But the problem is it doesn't inherit all the environment of the old version docker, from example if we install some program in the chaincode docker container, when we upgrade chaincode we need to install those program again in the new chaincode container.
 
Is there a solution, so that we don't need to re-install the program again and again when we upgrade our chaincode?
 
Bests, 
 


Re: Chaincode Upgrade Docker Container Environment

Brett T Logan <brett.t.logan@...>
 

In core.yaml you can specify your own chaincode runtime image for golang, Java or Node. So you can extend the image to include your tools, publish the image to a Docker registry and then use that as the runtime in your core.yaml:
 
 
 
Brett Logan
Software Engineer, IBM Blockchain
Phone: 1-984-242-6890
 
 
 

----- Original message -----
From: "Kimheng SOK" <sok.kimheng@...>
Sent by: fabric@...
To: hyperledger-fabric@...
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Chaincode Upgrade Docker Container Environment
Date: Fri, Jan 24, 2020 10:17 AM
 
Dear all,
 
I have one question, each time we upgrade our chaincode a new docker container is created. 
But the problem is it doesn't inherit all the environment of the old version docker, from example if we install some program in the chaincode docker container, when we upgrade chaincode we need to install those program again in the new chaincode container.
 
Is there a solution, so that we don't need to re-install the program again and again when we upgrade our chaincode?
 
Bests, 
 


Chaincode Upgrade Docker Container Environment

Kimheng SOK
 

Dear all,

I have one question, each time we upgrade our chaincode a new docker container is created. 
But the problem is it doesn't inherit all the environment of the old version docker, from example if we install some program in the chaincode docker container, when we upgrade chaincode we need to install those program again in the new chaincode container.

Is there a solution, so that we don't need to re-install the program again and again when we upgrade our chaincode?

Bests, 


Re: Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process

Yacov
 

Clients need to connect to the peer with port 7051
Chaincodes connect to the peer with port 7052

So when you install the chaincode, use port 7051



From:        "Marina Wanis" <marinamaged1996@...>
To:        Yacov Manevich <YACOVM@...>
Cc:        "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date:        01/24/2020 03:31 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process
Sent by:        fabric@...




Hi Yacov,
 
I’m not getting an error when I try to launch the chaincode anymore but now when I install the chaincode I get the following error. I made sure that the port is 7052. By setting up the environment variable : export CORE_PEER_ADDRESS="localhost:7052"
 
The error that I get when I install the chaincode is:-
Error: Error endorsing chaincode: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown
service protos.Endorser
 
Thanks,
Marina
 
Sent from Mailfor Windows 10
 

From: Yacov Manevich
Sent:
Friday, January 24, 2020 4:13 PM
To:
Marina Wanis
Cc:
hyperledger-fabric@...
Subject:
Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process

 
This means that the chaincode tries to access the peer over a port that is not correct.
By default, the peer listens to port 7052


Maybe the chaincode tries to access via a different port?




From:        
"Marina Wanis" <marinamaged1996@...>
To:        
"hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date:        
01/24/2020 08:53 AM
Subject:        
[EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process
Sent by:        
fabric@...




Hi,

I was trying to lunch the chaincode as a standalone process but I got the following error.
Can someone please explain me the cause of the following error?

2020-01-24 06:48:15.778 UTC [shim] chatWithPeer -> ERRO 005 Received error from server, ending chaincode stream: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport
receive failed
github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.chatWithPeer
       /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:362
github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.Start
       /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:156
main.main
       /vagrant/gocc/src/chaincode_example02/chaincode_example02.go:198
runtime.main
       /usr/local/go/src/runtime/proc.go:200
runtime.goexit
       /usr/local/go/src/runtime/asm_amd64.s:1337
Error starting Simple chaincode: receive failed: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport


Thanks,
Marina



 





Re: Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process

Marina Wanis <marinamaged1996@...>
 

Hi Yacov,

 

I’m not getting an error when I try to launch the chaincode anymore but now when I install the chaincode I get the following error. I made sure that the port is 7052. By setting up the environment variable : export CORE_PEER_ADDRESS="localhost:7052"

 

The error that I get when I install the chaincode is:-

Error: Error endorsing chaincode: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown

service protos.Endorser

 

Thanks,

Marina

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Yacov Manevich
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2020 4:13 PM
To: Marina Wanis
Cc: hyperledger-fabric@...
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process

 

This means that the chaincode tries to access the peer over a port that is not correct.
By default, the peer listens to port 7052

Maybe the chaincode tries to access via a different port?



From:        "Marina Wanis" <marinamaged1996@...>
To:        "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date:        01/24/2020 08:53 AM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process
Sent by:        fabric@...




Hi,
 
I was trying to lunch the chaincode as a standalone process but I got the following error.
Can someone please explain me the cause of the following error?
 
2020-01-24 06:48:15.778 UTC [shim] chatWithPeer -> ERRO 005 Received error from server, ending chaincode stream: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport
receive failed
github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.chatWithPeer
        /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:362
github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.Start
        /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:156
main.main
        /vagrant/gocc/src/chaincode_example02/chaincode_example02.go:198
runtime.main
        /usr/local/go/src/runtime/proc.go:200
runtime.goexit
        /usr/local/go/src/runtime/asm_amd64.s:1337
Error starting Simple chaincode: receive failed: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport
 
Thanks,
Marina



 


Re: Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process

Yacov
 

This means that the chaincode tries to access the peer over a port that is not correct.
By default, the peer listens to port 7052

Maybe the chaincode tries to access via a different port?



From:        "Marina Wanis" <marinamaged1996@...>
To:        "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date:        01/24/2020 08:53 AM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process
Sent by:        fabric@...




Hi,
 
I was trying to lunch the chaincode as a standalone process but I got the following error.
Can someone please explain me the cause of the following error?
 
2020-01-24 06:48:15.778 UTC [shim] chatWithPeer -> ERRO 005 Received error from server, ending chaincode stream: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport
receive failed
github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.chatWithPeer
        /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:362
github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.Start
        /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:156
main.main
        /vagrant/gocc/src/chaincode_example02/chaincode_example02.go:198
runtime.main
        /usr/local/go/src/runtime/proc.go:200
runtime.goexit
        /usr/local/go/src/runtime/asm_amd64.s:1337
Error starting Simple chaincode: receive failed: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport
 
Thanks,
Marina





yashukla47@...
 

I have a question.

Can orderers read all the transactions passing through them even from the channels of which their organization is not a part of

If yes, then is there any solution to implement complete decentralization (by having one orderer per organization) + Privacy among the members of the channel. except for using private data.


Error while trying to launch the chaincode as a standalone process

Marina Wanis <marinamaged1996@...>
 

Hi,

 

I was trying to lunch the chaincode as a standalone process but I got the following error.

Can someone please explain me the cause of the following error?

 

2020-01-24 06:48:15.778 UTC [shim] chatWithPeer -> ERRO 005 Received error from server, ending chaincode stream: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport

receive failed

github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.chatWithPeer

        /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:362

github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim.Start

        /vagrant/gocc/src/github.com/hyperledger/fabric/core/chaincode/shim/chaincode.go:156

main.main

        /vagrant/gocc/src/chaincode_example02/chaincode_example02.go:198

runtime.main

        /usr/local/go/src/runtime/proc.go:200

runtime.goexit

        /usr/local/go/src/runtime/asm_amd64.s:1337

Error starting Simple chaincode: receive failed: rpc error: code = Unimplemented desc = unknown service protos.ChaincodeSupport

 

Thanks,

Marina


Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Eastern hemisphere - Fri, 01/24/2020 #cal-notice

fabric@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Eastern hemisphere

When:
Friday, 24 January 2020
6:00am to 7:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/6223336701

Organizer:
a_o-dowd@... +441962816761

Description:
Documentation workgroup call.
Agenda, minutes and recordings: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/fabric/Documentation+Working+Group


configtxlator: error: open /dev/stdout: permission denied, try --help

Siddharth Jain
 

Hello

I have a simple question. I am trying to copy the output of configtxlator but get this error

```
$ configtxlator proto_decode --input ./foo.block --type common.Block | pbcopy -
configtxlator: error: open /dev/stdout: permission denied, try --help
```

I also tried using sudo but it still gives the error. For comparison below does not give me any error

```

$ echo "Hello World" | pbcopy -

```

Does anyone know how I can fix this? thanks


Re: Peer/Orderer memory usage

Baohua Yang
 

There's a known goroutine leakage in 1.4.4. You may need to apply this patchset.


On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 7:42 AM Eryargi, Hakan via Lists.Hyperledger.Org <hakan.eryargi=accenture.com@...> wrote:

Hi,

 

During our performance tests, we noticed that, both peers’ and orderers’ memory usage is increasing under load and they do not release the claimed memory when the load is removed.

 

Is this expected? Anything we can do about it on the configuration side?

 

Peers: Up to 15G -> This is especially very high

Orderers: Up to 4G

 

Fabric version: 1.4.4

 

Thanks,

Hakan

 

 

 

 




This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com



--
Best wishes!

Baohua Yang


Hyperledger Project Quarterly Update Due #tsc-project-update - Thu, 01/23/2020 #tsc-project-update #cal-notice

fabric@lists.hyperledger.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

Hyperledger Project Quarterly Update Due #tsc-project-update

When:
Thursday, 23 January 2020

Organizer:
community-architects@...

Description:
Please file a project status report for the TSC here:

https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/TSC/Project+Status+Updates


Chaincode gets instantiated but not able to invoke or list it #fabric #fabric-chaincode

Mrudav Shukla
 

I have a 3 Organisation (2 Normal Organization and 1 Orderer Organization) architecture on aws-eks. Each of the organizations has their own ca and tlsca. I have been able to generate the genesis block, the msp anchor transactions and the peers are able to join and create the channel as well as install the chaincode.

I am, however, facing issues when I instantiate the chaincode. The chaincode gets instantiated as seen from the docker-in-docker container. However, when I try to list the instantiated chaincode it does not come up.

I have gone through the following issues:
  1. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/56735065/chaincode-is-instantiated-but-doesnt-appear-in-the-list-of-instantiated-codes
  2. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46045970/why-peer-chaincode-instantiate-execuate-many-times-successfully/46048140#46048140
  3. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46035198/why-chaincode-instantiate-success-but-query-failed
These issues hint at errors in ordering service endpoints. I am using raft with 3 nodes and these nodes are able to connect with each other. Apart from this, when I submit peer chaincode fetch command from the peer or the cli container for fetching the block from the orderering service (node 1, 2 or 3), I am able to retrieve the blocks.

However, when I try to list the chaincode it shows nothing.

Following are the logs that I'm getting on peer:

2020-01-23 17:30:42.834 UTC [ConnProducer] NewConnection -> DEBU be6c Creating a new connection
2020-01-23 17:30:42.837 UTC [grpc] infof -> DEBU be6d transport: loopyWriter.run returning. connection error: desc = "transport is closing"
2020-01-23 17:30:42.837 UTC [grpc] DialContext -> DEBU be6e parsed scheme: ""
2020-01-23 17:30:42.838 UTC [grpc] DialContext -> DEBU be6f scheme "" not registered, fallback to default scheme
2020-01-23 17:30:42.838 UTC [grpc] watcher -> DEBU be70 ccResolverWrapper: sending new addresses to cc: [{raft2orderer.<domain>.in:7050 0  <nil>}]
2020-01-23 17:30:42.838 UTC [grpc] switchBalancer -> DEBU be71 ClientConn switching balancer to "pick_first"
2020-01-23 17:30:42.839 UTC [grpc] HandleSubConnStateChange -> DEBU be72 pickfirstBalancer: HandleSubConnStateChange: 0xc000368a60, CONNECTING
2020-01-23 17:30:42.850 UTC [grpc] HandleSubConnStateChange -> DEBU be73 pickfirstBalancer: HandleSubConnStateChange: 0xc000368a60, READY
2020-01-23 17:30:42.850 UTC [ConnProducer] NewConnection -> DEBU be74 Connected to {raft2orderer.<domain>.in:7050 [OrdererMSP]}
2020-01-23 17:30:42.850 UTC [deliveryClient] connect -> DEBU be75 Connected to raft2orderer.<domain>.in:7050
2020-01-23 17:30:42.850 UTC [deliveryClient] connect -> DEBU be76 Establishing gRPC stream with raft2orderer.<domain>.in:7050 ...
2020-01-23 17:30:42.851 UTC [deliveryClient] afterConnect -> DEBU be77 Entering
2020-01-23 17:30:42.851 UTC [deliveryClient] RequestBlocks -> INFO be78 Starting deliver with block [1] for channel <channel_name>
2020-01-23 17:30:42.851 UTC [msp] GetDefaultSigningIdentity -> DEBU be79 Obtaining default signing identity
2020-01-23 17:30:42.851 UTC [msp] GetDefaultSigningIdentity -> DEBU be7a Obtaining default signing identity
2020-01-23 17:30:42.851 UTC [msp.identity] Sign -> DEBU be7b Sign: plaintext: 0AC1090A3B08051A0608C2B0A7F10522...01120D1A0B08FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF01 
2020-01-23 17:30:42.851 UTC [msp.identity] Sign -> DEBU be7c Sign: digest: D8737137258DF932B21B3D16CC73C7A34FC652912476A90C14AAC8E3094E24D2 
2020-01-23 17:30:42.852 UTC [deliveryClient] afterConnect -> DEBU be7d Exiting
2020-01-23 17:30:42.853 UTC [blocksProvider] DeliverBlocks -> ERRO be7e [channel_name] Got error &{FORBIDDEN}
2020-01-23 17:30:43.884 UTC [gossip.comm] func1 -> DEBU be7f Got message: GossipMessage: tag:EMPTY hello:<nonce:9881102125581302162 msg_type:IDENTITY_MSG > , Envelope: 17 bytes, Signature: 0 bytes
Following are the logs that I'm getting on orderer:

2020-01-23 15:20:26.159 UTC [comm.grpc.server] 1 -> INFO 640 streaming call completed grpc.service=orderer.AtomicBroadcast grpc.method=Deliver grpc.peer_address=10.1.128.81:24518 grpc.peer_subject="CN=peer1OrgA.<domain>.in,OU=peer,O=Organization,L=Bengaluru,ST=Karnataka,C=IN" grpc.code=OK grpc.call_duration=997.532µs
2020-01-23 15:20:26.914 UTC [common.deliver] deliverBlocks -> WARN 641 [channel: <channel_name>] Client authorization revoked for deliver request from 10.1.128.81:50256: implicit policy evaluation failed - 0 sub-policies were satisfied, but this policy requires 1 of the 'Readers' sub-policies to be satisfied: permission denied
The following are the snippets from my configtx.yaml file:

Channel Policies:

Channel: &ChannelDefaults

    Policies:

        Readers:

            Type: ImplicitMeta

            Rule: "ANY Readers"

        Writers:

            Type: ImplicitMeta

            Rule: "ANY Writers"

        Admins:

            Type: ImplicitMeta

            Rule: "MAJORITY Admins"

    Capabilities:

        <<: *ChannelCapabilities

Application Policies:

Application: &ApplicationDefaults

    Organizations:

    Policies:

        Readers:

            Type: ImplicitMeta

            Rule: "ANY Readers"

        Writers:

            Type: ImplicitMeta

            Rule: "ANY Writers"

        Admins:

            Type: ImplicitMeta

            Rule: "MAJORITY Admins"

    Capabilities:

        <<: *ApplicationCapabilities

Organizations:

Organizations:

    - &Orderer

        Name: Orderer

        ID: OrdererMSP

        MSPDir: ordererOrganizations/msp

        Policies:

            Readers:

                Type: Signature

                Rule: "OR('OrdererMSP.member')"

            Writers:

                Type: Signature

                Rule: "OR('OrdererMSP.member')"

            Admins:

                Type: Signature

                Rule: "OR('OrdererMSP.admin')"

    - &Orga

        Name: Orga

        ID: OrgaMSP

        MSPDir: peerOrganizations/orga.<domain>.in/msp

        Policies:

            Readers:

                Type: Signature

                Rule: "OR(‘OrgaMSP.admin', ‘OrgaMSP.peer', ‘OrgaMSP.client')"

            Writers:

                Type: Signature

                Rule: "OR(‘OrgaMSP.admin', ‘OrgaMSP.client')"

            Admins:

                Type: Signature

                Rule: "OR(‘OrgaMSP.admin')"

        AnchorPeers:

            - Host: peer0orga.<domain>.in

              Port: 7051

Capabilities:

Capabilities:

    Channel: &ChannelCapabilities

        V1_4_3: true

        V1_3: false

        V1_1: false

    Orderer: &OrdererCapabilities

        V1_4_2: true

        V1_1: false

    Application: &ApplicationCapabilities

        V1_4_2: true

        V1_3: false

        V1_2: false

        V1_1: false


I have also enabled the NodeOUs and set the config.yaml at appropriate MSPs except for the Orderer. From the logs it looks like peer is trying to fetch blocks from the orderer but the orderer gives back 403 error to the peer. The Channel/Readers policy states allow "ANY Readers" and the requesting identity peer/admin does have appropriate rights for this. 

Any ideas where I am getting this wrong?

3921 - 3940 of 11512