Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Clarify Generic Verification Usefulness #774

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 30, 2022
Merged

Clarify Generic Verification Usefulness #774

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions spec/core/ics-002-client-semantics/README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -456,6 +456,8 @@ The caller is expected to construct the full `CommitmentPath` from a `Commitment
then it can pass in a non-zero `delayPeriodTime` or `delayPeriodBlocks`. If a delay period is not necessary, the caller must pass in 0 for `delayPeriodTime` and `delayPeriodBlocks`,
and the client will not enforce any delay period for verification.

Since the verification method is designed to give complete control to client implementations, clients can support chains that do not provide absence proofs by verifying the existence of a non-empty sentinel `ABSENCE` value. Thus in these special cases, the proof provided will be an ICS-23 Existence proof, and the client will verify that the `ABSENCE` value is stored under the given path for the given height.

```typescript
type verifyNonMembership = (
clientState: ClientState,
Expand Down