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.

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

add service provider rewards support #663

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jan 5, 2024
Merged

Conversation

andymck
Copy link
Contributor

@andymck andymck commented Nov 9, 2023

@andymck andymck force-pushed the andymck/service-provider-rewards branch from 8da38aa to 0f0a94c Compare November 15, 2023 16:22
@andymck andymck marked this pull request as ready for review November 17, 2023 15:23
@andymck andymck marked this pull request as draft November 30, 2023 14:44
@andymck andymck force-pushed the andymck/service-provider-rewards branch from 29651a6 to 4cb076f Compare December 5, 2023 10:00
@andymck andymck force-pushed the andymck/service-provider-rewards branch from 4cb076f to 5132f19 Compare December 8, 2023 13:32
@andymck andymck marked this pull request as ready for review December 8, 2023 13:33
@andymck andymck marked this pull request as draft December 8, 2023 13:36
@andymck andymck marked this pull request as ready for review December 11, 2023 14:05
Copy link
Contributor

@jeffgrunewald jeffgrunewald left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If I understand correctly here, the payer that we're using to sum data transfer credits burned by a service provider is the b58 text encoding of the carrier's public key and then we're storing a mapping of that public key to the string-entity key (name) of the service provider stored in the mobile config service but is that mapping not available on-chain such that we can just treat the service provider as a "rewardable entity" and look up their entity key from the metadata database the foundation populates?

mobile_verifier/src/reward_shares.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mobile_verifier/src/reward_shares.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
reward_index/src/indexer.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mobile_config/migrations/5_carrier_service.sql Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mobile_config/migrations/5_carrier_service.sql Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@andymck
Copy link
Contributor Author

andymck commented Dec 11, 2023

If I understand correctly here, the payer that we're using to sum data transfer credits burned by a service provider is the b58 text encoding of the carrier's public key and then we're storing a mapping of that public key to the string-entity key (name) of the service provider stored in the mobile config service but is that mapping not available on-chain such that we can just treat the service provider as a "rewardable entity" and look up their entity key from the metadata database the foundation populates?

good question, my understanding at the time was that we needed to add this to our internally managed DB. I dont recall the exact reason but i think it relates to the fact we only have the payer public key and that is not available as a direct translation on the metadata db populated by foundation ? But i may have just misunderstood and my context of the metadata DB is not that great. @bbalser thoughts?

@jeffgrunewald jeffgrunewald changed the title add server provider rewards support add service provider rewards support Dec 13, 2023
@andymck andymck force-pushed the andymck/service-provider-rewards branch from 06a0307 to fb698b0 Compare January 2, 2024 13:58
mobile_verifier/src/data_session.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
mobile_verifier/src/reward_shares.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@andymck andymck merged commit 06a515e into main Jan 5, 2024
1 check passed
@andymck andymck deleted the andymck/service-provider-rewards branch January 5, 2024 11:01
@andymck andymck mentioned this pull request Jan 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants