Date   

Where do I find the actual blockchain stored and view the block files?

Samyak Jain | TraceX
 

Dear Community, Where in the peer can I view the block files that get generated? I alrready tried searching in ledgersData/chains/channel dir but only found blockfile_000000 Is this the only file that stores the actual blockchain?


Re: Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?

Yacov
 

Yes, that's indeed the way to go if you want to have deploy reverse proxies in a Fabric ecosystem



From:        Gari Singh/Cambridge/IBM
To:        Yacov Manevich/Haifa/IBM@IBM
Cc:        "Ye, Qing" <ye_qing.pfu@...>, "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date:        12/11/2020 02:02 PM
Subject:        Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?




It is, however, possible to configure Nginx to do SNI-based routing with TLS passthrough.

See
https://gist.github.com/kekru/c09dbab5e78bf76402966b13fa72b9d2for an example config.

-----------------------------------------
Gari Singh
Distinguished Engineer, CTO - IBM Blockchain
IBM Middleware
550 King St
Littleton, MA 01460
Cell: 978-846-7499
garis@...
-----------------------------------------

-----fabric@... wrote: -----
To: "Ye, Qing" <ye_qing.pfu@...>
From: "Yacov"
Sent by: fabric@...
Date: 12/11/2020 06:06AM
Cc: "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?

I don't think you can do that because it means you need to terminate TLS in the proxy, and then the server behind it (orderer or peer) will not see a TLS connection from the remote node anymore.

Peer to peer communication in Fabric assumes mutual TLS, and so does orderer to orderer communication (Raft uses TLS pinning)



From:        "Ye, Qing" <ye_qing.pfu@...>
To:        "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date:        12/11/2020 07:36 AM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?
Sent by:        fabric@...



Hi, Thank you for reading this mail! We are using hyperledger...                                                                                                                                                                                          This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization.



Hi,
Thank you for reading this mail!

We are using hyperledger fabric 2.2 on CentOS 8.2.
In our environment, there are some peers and orderers use TLS to
communicate each other and it works quite well.

Then we’d like to turn off the port 7050 and 7051 by firewall.
There is only one port 5051 exposed, and can be accessed from other nodes.
We are using nginx in order to transfer the traffic, nginx.conf is like below.
But we met some errors when connecting each other.
------
   server {
       listen 5051 ssl http2;
       server_name ordererN.example.com;
       ssl_certificate ordererN.example.com.crt;
       ssl_certificate_key ordererN.example.com.key;
       location / {
           grpc_pass grpcs://ordererN.example.com:7050;
       }
   }
   server {
       listen 5051 ssl http2;
       server_name peerN.org1.example.com;
       ssl_certificate peerN.org1.example.com.crt;
       ssl_certificate_key peerN.org1.example.com.key;
       location / {
           grpc_pass grpcs://peerN.org1.example.com:7051;
       }
   }
------
*peerN/ordererN is the peer/orderer in node N.

First of all, is it possible to transfer the fabric’s grpcs requests by nginx?

Best wishes
Qing, Ye
2020/12/11



   




Re: Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?

Gari Singh <garis@...>
 

It is, however, possible to configure Nginx to do SNI-based routing with TLS passthrough.

See https://gist.github.com/kekru/c09dbab5e78bf76402966b13fa72b9d2 for an example config.

-----------------------------------------
Gari Singh
Distinguished Engineer, CTO - IBM Blockchain
IBM Middleware
550 King St
Littleton, MA 01460
Cell: 978-846-7499
garis@...
-----------------------------------------

-----fabric@... wrote: -----
To: "Ye, Qing" <ye_qing.pfu@...>
From: "Yacov"
Sent by: fabric@...
Date: 12/11/2020 06:06AM
Cc: "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger Fabric] Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?

I don't think you can do that because it means you need to terminate TLS in the proxy, and then the server behind it (orderer or peer) will not see a TLS connection from the remote node anymore.

Peer to peer communication in Fabric assumes mutual TLS, and so does orderer to orderer communication (Raft uses TLS pinning)



From: "Ye, Qing" <ye_qing.pfu@...>
To: "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date: 12/11/2020 07:36 AM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?
Sent by: fabric@...



Hi, Thank you for reading this mail! We are using hyperledger... This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization.



Hi,
Thank you for reading this mail!

We are using hyperledger fabric 2.2 on CentOS 8.2.
In our environment, there are some peers and orderers use TLS to
communicate each other and it works quite well.

Then we’d like to turn off the port 7050 and 7051 by firewall.
There is only one port 5051 exposed, and can be accessed from other nodes.
We are using nginx in order to transfer the traffic, nginx.conf is like below.
But we met some errors when connecting each other.
------
server {
listen 5051 ssl http2;
server_name ordererN.example.com;
ssl_certificate ordererN.example.com.crt;
ssl_certificate_key ordererN.example.com.key;
location / {
grpc_pass grpcs://ordererN.example.com:7050;
}
}
server {
listen 5051 ssl http2;
server_name peerN.org1.example.com;
ssl_certificate peerN.org1.example.com.crt;
ssl_certificate_key peerN.org1.example.com.key;
location / {
grpc_pass grpcs://peerN.org1.example.com:7051;
}
}
------
*peerN/ordererN is the peer/orderer in node N.

First of all, is it possible to transfer the fabric’s grpcs requests by nginx?

Best wishes
Qing, Ye
2020/12/11


Re: Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?

Yacov
 

I don't think you can do that because it means you need to terminate TLS in the proxy, and then the server behind it (orderer or peer) will not see a TLS connection from the remote node anymore.

Peer to peer communication in Fabric assumes mutual TLS, and so does orderer to orderer communication (Raft uses TLS pinning)



From:        "Ye, Qing" <ye_qing.pfu@...>
To:        "hyperledger-fabric@..." <hyperledger-fabric@...>
Date:        12/11/2020 07:36 AM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?
Sent by:        fabric@...




Hi, Thank you for reading this mail! We are using hyperledger...                                                                                                                                                                                      
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.




Hi,
Thank you for reading this mail!
 
We are using hyperledger fabric 2.2 on CentOS 8.2.
In our environment, there are some peers and orderers use TLS to
communicate each other and it works quite well.
 
Then we’d like to turn off the port 7050 and 7051 by firewall.
There is only one port 5051 exposed, and can be accessed from other nodes.
We are using nginx in order to transfer the traffic, nginx.conf is like below.
But we met some errors when connecting each other.
------
    server {
        listen 5051 ssl http2;
        server_name ordererN.example.com;
        ssl_certificate ordererN.example.com.crt;
        ssl_certificate_key ordererN.example.com.key;
        location / {
            grpc_pass grpcs://ordererN.example.com:7050;
        }
    }
    server {
        listen 5051 ssl http2;
        server_name peerN.org1.example.com;
        ssl_certificate peerN.org1.example.com.crt;
        ssl_certificate_key peerN.org1.example.com.key;
        location / {
            grpc_pass grpcs://peerN.org1.example.com:7051;
        }
    }
------
*peerN/ordererN is the peer/orderer in node N.
 
First of all, is it possible to transfer the fabric’s grpcs requests by nginx?
 
Best wishes
Qing, Ye
2020/12/11
 





Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Eastern hemisphere - Fri, 12/11/2020 #cal-notice

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

Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Eastern hemisphere

When:
Friday, 11 December 2020
6:00am to 7:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup?pwd=dkJKdHRlc3dNZEdKR1JYdW40R2pDUT09

Organizer:
pama@...

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


Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/6223336701?pwd=dkJKdHRlc3dNZEdKR1JYdW40R2pDUT09
 
Meeting ID: 622 333 6701
Passcode: 475869


Re: Minifabric: Unable to connect to peer from cli container #minifabric #minifab #fabric

email4tong@gmail.com
 

You need to use -e true flag when you setup network



Sent from my Galaxy Tab® S2

-------- Original message --------
From: Kevin X <kevinx8888@...>
Date: 12/10/20 11:02 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: fabric@...
Subject: [Hyperledger Fabric] Minifabric: Unable to connect to peer from cli container #minifabric #minifab #fabric

I am using minifabric and I am unable to connect to peer from cli container. Below is the error message that I get:

bash-5.0# peer channel list

Error: error getting endorser client for channel: endorser client failed to connect to peer1.org0.example.com:7051: failed to create new connection: context deadline exceeded


Telnet works:

bash-5.0# busybox-extras telnet peer1.org0.example.com 7051

Connected to peer1.org0.example.com

Here are the docker networks. cli container is on 44c3e45be7_net as peer is on fabric-dev_default. As mentioned above, telnet from cli container to the peer works

docker network ls

NETWORK ID          NAME                 DRIVER              SCOPE

d202c46c415e        44c3e45be7_net       bridge              local

86d970de58d0        bridge               bridge              local

b90c797c4cb2        fabric-dev_default   bridge              local

ff3e7fd228ae        host                 host                local

25abbf760f9b        none                 null                local


Is it possible to transfer the grpcs requests by nginx?

Ye, Qing <ye_qing.pfu@...>
 

Hi,

Thank you for reading this mail!

 

We are using hyperledger fabric 2.2 on CentOS 8.2.

In our environment, there are some peers and orderers use TLS to

communicate each other and it works quite well.

 

Then wed like to turn off the port 7050 and 7051 by firewall.

There is only one port 5051 exposed, and can be accessed from other nodes.

We are using nginx in order to transfer the traffic, nginx.conf is like below.

But we met some errors when connecting each other.

------

    server {

        listen 5051 ssl http2;

        server_name ordererN.example.com;

        ssl_certificate ordererN.example.com.crt;

        ssl_certificate_key ordererN.example.com.key;

        location / {

            grpc_pass grpcs://ordererN.example.com:7050;

        }

    }

    server {

        listen 5051 ssl http2;

        server_name peerN.org1.example.com;

        ssl_certificate peerN.org1.example.com.crt;

        ssl_certificate_key peerN.org1.example.com.key;

        location / {

            grpc_pass grpcs://peerN.org1.example.com:7051;

        }

    }

------

*peerN/ordererN is the peer/orderer in node N.

 

First of all, is it possible to transfer the fabrics grpcs requests by nginx?

 

Best wishes

Qing, Ye

2020/12/11

 


Minifabric: Unable to connect to peer from cli container #minifabric #minifab #fabric

Kevin X
 

I am using minifabric and I am unable to connect to peer from cli container. Below is the error message that I get:

bash-5.0# peer channel list

Error: error getting endorser client for channel: endorser client failed to connect to peer1.org0.example.com:7051: failed to create new connection: context deadline exceeded


Telnet works:

bash-5.0# busybox-extras telnet peer1.org0.example.com 7051

Connected to peer1.org0.example.com

Here are the docker networks. cli container is on 44c3e45be7_net as peer is on fabric-dev_default. As mentioned above, telnet from cli container to the peer works

docker network ls

NETWORK ID          NAME                 DRIVER              SCOPE

d202c46c415e        44c3e45be7_net       bridge              local

86d970de58d0        bridge               bridge              local

b90c797c4cb2        fabric-dev_default   bridge              local

ff3e7fd228ae        host                 host                local

25abbf760f9b        none                 null                local


Joined peer or out of sync peers don't sync blocks

David Viejo <davidviejopomata@...>
 

Hi,

When I join a new peer or the peer is offline and lags behind the maximum ledger, they are not able to recover.

In the next image, I have a channel with 6 peers; the first one is the anchor peer; half of them are synchronized.
image.png

The last peer I joined is the last one, it got 6 blocks, and it stopped:
2020-12-10 22:01:28.941 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 027 [ch1] Committed block [0] with 1 transaction(s) in 358ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=257ms state_commit=68ms) commitHash=[]
2020-12-10 22:01:36.094 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 039 [ch1] Committed block [1] with 1 transaction(s) in 623ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=398ms state_commit=135ms) commitHash=[47dc540c94ceb704a23875c11273e16bb0b8a87aed84de911f2133568115f254]
2020-12-10 22:01:36.676 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 03d [ch1] Committed block [2] with 1 transaction(s) in 405ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=240ms state_commit=34ms) commitHash=[439ab3bf363b8ece7997c64c7fb292f0696d9044928b881fc15c0e12fb547c88]
2020-12-10 22:01:37.123 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 042 [ch1] Committed block [3] with 1 transaction(s) in 445ms (state_validation=83ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=252ms state_commit=65ms) commitHash=[c2166d78fd3344f11b220731560dfb78972bc81d7772503f6a00f6fad10e37bd]
2020-12-10 22:01:37.557 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 046 [ch1] Committed block [4] with 1 transaction(s) in 383ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=308ms state_commit=41ms) commitHash=[8468cf437d8dc1edcb48815885daa4d1d74ec70e34154cdf9ddb73607bc193ef]
2020-12-10 22:01:37.974 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 04a [ch1] Committed block [5] with 1 transaction(s) in 412ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=219ms state_commit=112ms) commitHash=[1e892493707e9c13a1a98d0f8de3e652b47714842c869c6c898691ae30a0afbe]


Logs from the orderer are the following:
2020-12-10 22:01:35.088 UTC [blkstorage] nextBlockBytesAndPlacementInfo -> DEBU 10a4c blockbytes [7148] read from file [0]
2020-12-10 22:01:35.088 UTC [common.deliver] deliverBlocks -> DEBU 10a4d [channel: ch1] Delivering block [23] for (0xc000817080) for 10.244.0.1:54200
2020-12-10 22:01:35.169 UTC [grpc] InfoDepth -> DEBU 10a4e [transport]transport: loopyWriter.run returning. connection error: desc = "transport is closing"
2020-12-10 22:01:35.169 UTC [common.deliver] deliverBlocks -> WARN 10a4f [channel: ch1] Error sending to 10.244.0.1:54200: rpc error: code = Unavailable desc = transport is closing
2020-12-10 22:01:35.170 UTC [orderer.common.server] func1 -> DEBU 10a50 Closing Deliver stream
2020-12-10 22:01:35.170 UTC [comm.grpc.server] 1 -> INFO 10a51 streaming call completed grpc.service=orderer.AtomicBroadcast grpc.method=Deliver grpc.peer_address=10.244.0.1:54200 error="rpc error: code = Unavailable desc = transport is closing" grpc.code=Unavailable grpc.call_duration=90.588445ms
2020-12-10 22:01:35.170 UTC [blkstorage] waitForBlock -> DEBU 10a52 Came out of wait. maxAvailaBlockNumber=[490]
2020-12-10 22:01:35.170 UTC [blkstorage] waitForBlock -> DEBU 10a53 Going to wait for newer blocks. maxAvailaBlockNumber=[490], waitForBlockNum=[491]


When submitting transactions, gossip protocol works for those peers who are already at max ledger, those who are not in sync; obviously, the following error occurs:

2020-12-10 22:15:48.698 UTC [gossip.state] func1 -> WARN 075 Block [491] received from gossip wasn't added to payload buffer: Ledger height is at 6, cannot enqueue block with sequence of 491
2020-12-10 22:15:53.008 UTC [gossip.state] func1 -> WARN 077 Block [492] received from gossip wasn't added to payload buffer: Ledger height is at 6, cannot enqueue block with sequence of 492
2020-12-10 22:15:58.370 UTC [gossip.state] func1 -> WARN 07b Block [493] received from gossip wasn't added to payload buffer: Ledger height is at 6, cannot enqueue block with sequence of 493


But for example, peer4, who is in sync, it gets the blocks.

2020-12-10 22:15:49.129 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 107a [ipregisterchannel] Committed block [491] with 1 transaction(s) in 431ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=272ms state_commit=112ms) commitHash=[2ceca002b37c342bfd27d79daa8db8be30689b7017b8072099cb06ebd6894a2c]
2020-12-10 22:15:54.281 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 1081 [ipregisterchannel] Committed block [492] with 1 transaction(s) in 1275ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=416ms state_commit=699ms) commitHash=[b18c18383a89ff1a0227db0d2e30df5ccdc4050eb81dace46630fd1fa9e53c71]
2020-12-10 22:15:59.410 UTC [kvledger] commit -> INFO 1086 [ipregisterchannel] Committed block [493] with 1 transaction(s) in 940ms (state_validation=0ms block_and_pvtdata_commit=580ms state_commit=196ms) commitHash=[426034933e0270322412ee474ea5ddf9cc9d00a4053e4f8691d3fb8f04c296cd]

After submitting some transactions, the state is the following:
image.png

I have a few questions:

The peer goes to the orderer, why doesn't the peer retry to try to get in sync with the ledger height?
Is there any critical configuration that may be missing?

Thank you so much for your attention and participation.




Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Western hemisphere - Fri, 12/11/2020 11:00am-12:00pm #cal-reminder

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

Reminder: Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Western hemisphere

When: Friday, 11 December 2020, 11:00am to 12:00pm, (GMT-05:00) America/New York

Where:https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup?pwd=dkJKdHRlc3dNZEdKR1JYdW40R2pDUT09

View Event

Organizer: Pam Andrejko pama@...

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

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/6223336701?pwd=dkJKdHRlc3dNZEdKR1JYdW40R2pDUT09
 
Meeting ID: 622 333 6701
Passcode: 475869


Re: Error in executing commands on peer container #fabric

Prasanth Sundaravelu
 

Yes, check this out: 


It is asked to set following env. variables:
# Environment variables for Org1

export CORE_PEER_TLS_ENABLED=true
export CORE_PEER_LOCALMSPID="Org1MSP"
export CORE_PEER_TLS_ROOTCERT_FILE=${PWD}/organizations/peerOrganizations/org1.example.com/peers/peer0.org1.example.com/tls/ca.crt
export CORE_PEER_MSPCONFIGPATH=${PWD}/organizations/peerOrganizations/org1.example.com/users/Admin@.../msp
export CORE_PEER_ADDRESS=localhost:7051

CORE_PEER_MSPCONFIGPATH determines the signing identity, in which admin identity is chosen in the above example.


On Thu, 10 Dec 2020, 8:52 pm Kevin X, <kevinx8888@...> wrote:
Thanks Prasanth.

How can I tell peer to use admin identity, I do not see any command line option to specify the identity to use. Is this driven by an environment variable.

It is also not clear which identity does the peer command uses by default - can anyone provide details around this?

Thanks Community


Re: Error in executing commands on peer container #fabric

Kevin X
 

Thanks Prasanth.

How can I tell peer to use admin identity, I do not see any command line option to specify the identity to use. Is this driven by an environment variable.

It is also not clear which identity does the peer command uses by default - can anyone provide details around this?

Thanks Community


Re: Error in executing commands on peer container #fabric

Prasanth Sundaravelu
 

Yes, Lifecycle operations should be carried out by admin identity.


On Thu, 10 Dec 2020, 11:02 am Kevin X, <kevinx8888@...> wrote:
 
I am logged on a peer container. When I execute any peer command, I get an ACL error. Below is an example:
 
 
peer lifecycle chaincode querycommitted --channelID mychannel --name basic --cafile ${FABRIC_CFG_PATH}/msp/tlscacerts/tlsca1.org0.example.
com-cert.pem
 
Error: query failed with status: 500 - Failed to authorize invocation due to failed ACL check: Failed evaluating policy on signed data during check policy on channel [mychannel] with policy [/Channel/Application/Writers]: [implicit policy evaluation failed - 0 sub-policies were satisfied, but this policy requires 1 of the 'Writers' sub-policies to be satisfied]
 
Which user does peer command use to sign the message? Do I need to specify an admin user while using the peer command?
 
Any other suggestion on how I can execute the command from peer container will be much appreciated.


Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Eastern hemisphere - Fri, 12/11/2020 6:00am-7:00am #cal-reminder

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

Reminder: Hyperledger Fabric Documentation Workgroup call - Eastern hemisphere

When: Friday, 11 December 2020, 6:00am to 7:00am, (GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.backup?pwd=dkJKdHRlc3dNZEdKR1JYdW40R2pDUT09

View Event

Organizer: Pam Andrejko pama@...

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


Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/6223336701?pwd=dkJKdHRlc3dNZEdKR1JYdW40R2pDUT09
 
Meeting ID: 622 333 6701
Passcode: 475869


Error in executing commands on peer container #fabric

Kevin X
 

 
I am logged on a peer container. When I execute any peer command, I get an ACL error. Below is an example:
 
 
peer lifecycle chaincode querycommitted --channelID mychannel --name basic --cafile ${FABRIC_CFG_PATH}/msp/tlscacerts/tlsca1.org0.example.
com-cert.pem
 
Error: query failed with status: 500 - Failed to authorize invocation due to failed ACL check: Failed evaluating policy on signed data during check policy on channel [mychannel] with policy [/Channel/Application/Writers]: [implicit policy evaluation failed - 0 sub-policies were satisfied, but this policy requires 1 of the 'Writers' sub-policies to be satisfied]
 
Which user does peer command use to sign the message? Do I need to specify an admin user while using the peer command?
 
Any other suggestion on how I can execute the command from peer container will be much appreciated.


Fabric Contributor Meeting - Wed, 12/09/2020 #cal-notice

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

Fabric Contributor Meeting

When:
Wednesday, 9 December 2020
9:00am to 10:00am
(GMT-05:00) America/New York

Where:
https://zoom.us/my/hyperledger.community.3?pwd=UE90WHhEaHRqOGEyMkV3cldKa2d2dz09

Organizer:
enyeart@...

Description:
For meeting agendas, recordings, and more details, see https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/fabric/Contributor+Meetings

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/5184947650?pwd=UE90WHhEaHRqOGEyMkV3cldKa2d2dz09
 
Meeting ID: 518 494 7650
Passcode: 475869


Re: Instantiate nodejs chaincdoe without internet

Matthew White
 

Hello;
 
 
 
Regards, Matthew.
Matthew B White  IBM Blockchain Solutions Architect
 
Email me at WHITEMAT@...
Find me on StackOverflow, and generally at  calanais.me.uk
 
Note: restricted availability for meetings 14:30 to 17:00 UK Tuesday 
IBM United Kingdom Limited, Hursley Park, Winchester, Hampshire, SO21 2JN

"The wrong answers are the ones you go looking for when the right answers stare you in the face"
 
 
 
----- Original message -----
From: "grapebaba" <281165273grape@...>
Sent by: fabric@...
To: fabric@...
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Instantiate nodejs chaincdoe without internet
Date: Wed, Dec 9, 2020 12:15 PM
 
Do we have a way to instantiate nodejs chaincode without internet access?
 
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


Instantiate nodejs chaincdoe without internet

grapebaba
 

Do we have a way to instantiate nodejs chaincode without internet access?


Fabric Contributor Meeting - December 9, 2020

David Enyeart
 

Hyperledger Fabric Contributor Meeting

When: Every other Wednesday 9am US Eastern, 14:00 UTC

Where: https://zoom.us/j/5184947650?pwd=UE90WHhEaHRqOGEyMkV3cldKa2d2dz09

Agendas and Recordings: https://wiki.hyperledger.org/display/fabric/Contributor+Meetings

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agenda for December 9, 2020

- Fabric roadmap


Re: Cross-org p2p block dissemination

David Enyeart
 

The recommendation, and defaults as of v2.2, is for all peers to get blocks from an ordering node. You will have more options in terms of permission management if you use separate orgs.


"Carlos Eduardo Matos Ellery" ---12/08/2020 11:33:36 AM---Hi All, In a simple case of data dissemination from one to many: there is one

From: "Carlos Eduardo Matos Ellery" <carlos.ellery@...>
To: fabric@...
Date: 12/08/2020 11:33 AM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Hyperledger Fabric] Cross-org p2p block dissemination
Sent by: fabric@...





Hi All,

In a simple case of data dissemination from one to many: there is one
entity (must be an Org) that is the only Tx proponent/endorser/orderer
and there are other entities that just want to receive the data and
commit them to their World State. For these "reader" entities there are
two options: (A) designate one Org for each entity or (B) use a single
Org for all entities (each one being only a peer of this big Org).

Which configuration (A or B) would provide better network efficiency
using p2p communication to disseminate the blocks? Gossip would work
well on configuration B (same Org for all readers), but what about
option A? Does exist p2p communication between peers of different
organizations to disseminate blocks? The goal would be to cause less
impact on the OrgA entity network (which owns the orderers too).

Thanks in advance!

--
Carlos Eduardo Matos Ellery