Commit graph

3 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Rob
61bfc03413 Resolve issue #1 — five §7.2/§7.3 gaps from clean-room JS implementation
Reporter implemented §7.2.6 minimum-leaf path-request responder + §7.3
ratchet rotation in thatSFguy/reticulum-lora-webclient and surfaced
five small gaps. Each is fixed below; the first is a real spec
correction backed by a new runtime verifier.

#### 1. §7.3 dedup-mechanism claim was wrong (verified)

Earlier §7.3 claimed transit nodes dedup on '(destination_hash,
ratchet_pub)' tuples. Reporter pointed out this can't be right:
upstream's RATCHET_INTERVAL = 30 min × ANNOUNCE_INTERVAL = 5-15 min
means most upstream announces share a ratchet across 2-6 emissions.
If relays really dropped on ratchet_pub equality, upstream wouldn't
function.

Confirmed by new tools/verify_ratchet_dedup.py: builds two announces
with same ratchet_pub but distinct random_hash[:5], walks the
upstream replay-defence machinery (Transport.py:1707,1732,1745
'not random_blob in random_blobs' check) by hand. Both announces
ACCEPTED — dedup is keyed on random_blob, not on ratchet_pub.

§7.3 rewritten:
  - Drops the wrong dedup claim with an explicit ⚠️ Spec correction
    callout naming the bug.
  - Reframes ratchet rotation as forward-secrecy hygiene, not a
    mesh-visibility requirement.
  - Points at §4.5 step 6.3 / §4.1 for the actual replay-defence
    mechanism.
  - Documents upstream's at-most-every-30-min rotation cadence
    (rotate_ratchets is a no-op if RATCHET_INTERVAL hasn't elapsed).
  - Says clean-room MAY rotate per-announce or follow upstream's
    cadence — either is interop-correct.

#### 2. Path-response ratchet rotation guidance — §7.3.4 (new)

Added explicit guidance: path-response announces SHOULD reuse the
current ratchet rather than rotate. Burst-rotating on identical-target
path? requests would burn ratchet-ring slots without forward-secrecy
benefit. Upstream's no-op-if-recent gate enforces this implicitly.

#### 3. Leaf dedup-table size — §7.2.6 step 4

Added: 'A leaf-appropriate cap is 128–256 entries with FIFO eviction;
the upstream max_pr_tags = 32000 is sized for a transit node.'

#### 4. PR_TAG_WINDOW body cache for leaves — §7.2.6 trailing

Added: 'Leaves may skip the §7.2.5 PR_TAG_WINDOW body cache' with
explanation that step 4's dedup table already collapses identical-tag
retransmits and a leaf isn't fanning to multiple downstream relays.

#### 5. PLAIN destination recipe link — §7.2.1

Added: 'The path-request destination is a PLAIN destination ... per
the PLAIN/GROUP recipe in §1.4.3 (the identity == None branch).'
Surfaces the connection that's currently buried in §1.4 titled 'GROUP
destinations' but actually covers PLAIN too.

agent.md §5 audit table updated — §7.3 entry corrected to note the
prior 'verified' claim was actually mis-attributed; the test result
came from incidental random_hash rotation, not ratchet rotation.

13 of 13 verifiers in tools/ now pass.

Closes #1.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-03 20:38:01 -04:00
Rob
95823ad840 Add §10 Resource fragmentation + send-resource flow
Closes Tier 1 #2. Without this, a client can't send any LXMF body
larger than LINK_PACKET_MAX_CONTENT ≈ 360 B, can't receive a NomadNet
page that doesn't fit in one MTU, and can't transfer files via rncp.

SPEC.md §10 (new): full Resource fragmentation protocol with citations
to RNS/Resource.py. 13 sub-sections covering preparation pipeline
(metadata prefix → optional bz2 → random_hash prefix → SHA-256 over
data||random_hash → link.encrypt of the WHOLE blob → part-split into
SDU-sized chunks → 4-byte map_hash hashmap with collision guard within
COLLISION_GUARD_SIZE = 2*WINDOW_MAX + HASHMAP_MAX_LEN), wire context
inventory (RESOURCE_ADV / RESOURCE / RESOURCE_REQ / RESOURCE_HMU /
RESOURCE_PRF / RESOURCE_ICL / RESOURCE_RCL), the msgpack dict for the
advertisement (t/d/n/h/r/o/i/l/q/f/m), the request payload format with
the hashmap_exhausted sentinel, the lazy-hashmap RESOURCE_HMU
continuation that lets large hashmaps avoid breaking small-MTU links,
the proof body
   resource_hash(32) || full_proof = SHA256(data||hash) (32)
returned in a PROOF-type packet, the sliding window dynamics
(WINDOW=4 → WINDOW_MAX_FAST=75 / WINDOW_MAX_VERY_SLOW=4 with rate
detection), multi-segment cutover at MAX_EFFICIENT_SIZE = 1 MiB - 1
with the lazy `__prepare_next_segment` pattern, and the
encryption-before-split layering that means a missing part can't be
decrypted in isolation.

flows/send-resource.md: 10-step chronology from RNS.Resource()
construction through advertise → req/parts loop → HMU continuation →
final RESOURCE_PRF → multi-segment fan-out, with a wire-byte ladder
diagram and a per-step source map.

Side fixes found while drafting:
  - SPEC.md §2.5 contexts table was wildly incomplete and had a real
    bug: KEEPALIVE was listed as 0xFD; upstream is 0xFA per
    RNS/Packet.py:87. 0xFD is actually LINKPROOF (the regular
    DATA-receipt context, §6.5). Replaced with the full upstream
    context inventory: NONE, RESOURCE_*, CACHE_REQUEST, REQUEST,
    RESPONSE, PATH_RESPONSE, COMMAND, COMMAND_STATUS, CHANNEL,
    KEEPALIVE, LINKIDENTIFY, LINKCLOSE, LINKPROOF, LRRTT, LRPROOF.
  - SPEC.md §6.5 reworded: "send back a PROOF packet (no context
    byte specifics)" → "send back a PROOF-type packet with
    context = LINKPROOF (0xFD)" for clarity.
  - The previously-numbered §10 "Test vectors" and §11 "Source map"
    are renumbered to §11 / §12 so the new Resource section lands in
    its correct protocol-stack position. agent.md §5 audit table
    updated accordingly.

flows/README.md status table updated; receive-resource.md added as
the next pending flow.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-03 11:08:40 -04:00
Rob
cafb2889ab Initial bootstrap: README, LICENSE, SPEC.md, agent.md, scaffolding
Bootstrapped from the working notes of two reverse-engineering efforts:
- reticulum-lora-webclient (web/Capacitor)
- reticulum-mobile-app (Kotlin Multiplatform / Android)

SPEC.md consolidates byte-level wire format findings that aren't in the
upstream Reticulum manual. Each section grounded in upstream Python
source citations (file + line) where possible.

agent.md establishes the verification rules:
- Every claim is verified, unverified, or speculation; markers required
- Verification means a runnable script or a source citation
- PRs that quietly remove markers get rejected

tools/ and test-vectors/ are placeholder scaffolding with READMEs
describing the work needed.

Sections in SPEC.md flagged as currently UNVERIFIED:
- §2.3 Originator HEADER_1 -> HEADER_2 conversion
- §4.3 app_data 3-element variant with capabilities
- §7.1 path? always precedes LXMF (vs only on stale paths)
- §7.4 ratchet ring count default = 8

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-03 09:38:46 -04:00