feat: add PermissionedDomains support (XLS-80) by e-desouza · Pull Request #331 · XRPLF/xrpl-rust

e-desouza · 2026-06-23T18:54:02Z

Summary

Implements XLS-80 (PermissionedDomains) support for xrpl-rust.

New transaction types

PermissionedDomainSet — Create or update a permissioned domain with a list of AcceptedCredentials
PermissionedDomainDelete — Delete an existing permissioned domain by DomainID

New ledger entry type

PermissionedDomain (LedgerEntryType = 0x0082) — On-ledger permissioned domain object with Owner, AcceptedCredentials, Sequence, and audit fields

Shared types

Credential — Nested STObject (via serde_with_tag!) with required Issuer and CredentialType fields

Validation

PermissionedDomainSet.get_errors() rejects: empty credentials list, duplicate (Issuer, CredentialType) pairs (case-normalised), invalid issuer address, malformed CredentialType hex, all-zero DomainID, list exceeding 10 entries
PermissionedDomainDelete.get_errors() rejects all-zero DomainID
ledger_entry PermissionedDomain selector validated: Index must be 64-char hex; Object requires valid classic address and u32-range seq

Registration

TransactionType::PermissionedDomainSet, TransactionType::PermissionedDomainDelete added to enum
LedgerEntryType::PermissionedDomain (0x0082) added to enum
XRPLRequest::LedgerEntry boxed to fix large_enum_variant clippy

CI

Integration test health check polls xrpld /server_info directly instead of relying on Docker container health status

Test plan

Serde roundtrip tests for PermissionedDomainSet, PermissionedDomainDelete, PermissionedDomain
Validation: empty creds, duplicate creds, invalid issuer, bad hex, zero DomainID, oversized list
ledger_entry selector tests: Index (valid + invalid hex), Object (valid + invalid address)
Integration tests: full lifecycle (Set → fetch → Delete), error codes (temARRAY_EMPTY, tecNO_ISSUER), account_objects filter, ledger_entry by index and by account+seq
cargo fmt, cargo clippy --all-features -D warnings, cargo test --release pass
no_std build clean

Supersedes #157.

codecov · 2026-06-23T19:00:55Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 95.31835% with 50 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 86.15%. Comparing base (e4fab93) to head (a0f5fc1).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/models/ledger/objects/permissioned_domain.rs	86.33%	25 Missing ⚠️
src/models/transactions/permissioned_domain_set.rs	97.29%	16 Missing ⚠️
.../models/transactions/permissioned_domain_delete.rs	95.98%	9 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #331      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   85.77%   86.15%   +0.38%     
==========================================
  Files         235      238       +3     
  Lines       26828    27891    +1063     
==========================================
+ Hits        23012    24030    +1018     
- Misses       3816     3861      +45

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	`71.32% <ø> (-0.20%)`	⬇️
unit	`86.85% <95.31%> (+0.38%)`	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/models/ledger/objects/mod.rs	`84.09% <ø> (ø)`
src/models/requests/account_objects.rs	`92.30% <ø> (ø)`
src/models/requests/ledger_entry.rs	`94.17% <100.00%> (+3.66%)`	⬆️
src/models/requests/mod.rs	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/models/transactions/mod.rs	`58.38% <ø> (+2.01%)`	⬆️
.../models/transactions/permissioned_domain_delete.rs	`95.98% <95.98%> (ø)`
src/models/transactions/permissioned_domain_set.rs	`97.29% <97.29%> (ø)`
src/models/ledger/objects/permissioned_domain.rs	`86.33% <86.33%> (ø)`

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

ckeshava · 2026-06-24T22:48:34Z

+        if let Some(pd) = &self.permissioned_domain {
+            match pd {
+                PermissionedDomain::Index(id) => {
+                    if id.len() != 64
+                        || !id.chars().all(|c| c.is_ascii_hexdigit())
+                        || id.chars().all(|c| c == '0')
+                    {
+                        return Err(XRPLModelException::InvalidValue {
+                            field: "permissioned_domain.index".into(),
+                            expected: "non-zero 64-character hex string".into(),
+                            found: id.as_ref().into(),
+                        });
+                    }
+                }
+                PermissionedDomain::Object(obj) => {
+                    if !crate::core::addresscodec::is_valid_classic_address(&obj.account) {
+                        return Err(XRPLModelException::InvalidValue {
+                            field: "permissioned_domain.account".into(),
+                            expected: "valid classic XRPL address".into(),
+                            found: obj.account.as_ref().into(),
+                        });
+                    }
+                }
+            }
+        }


This check is not necessary. The values returned from a rippled server are from the XRPL blockchain state data. If there are errors in that data, it must be caught and validated by the rippled node implementation. There is little that the client library can do to solve that problem.

Removed in 904cfdd. No other ledger_entry selector validates fields client-side — the PD selector now matches that convention.

ckeshava · 2026-06-24T22:49:33Z

    LedgerCurrent(ledger_current::LedgerCurrent<'a>),
    LedgerData(ledger_data::LedgerData<'a>),
-    LedgerEntry(ledger_entry::LedgerEntry<'a>),
+    LedgerEntry(alloc::boxed::Box<ledger_entry::LedgerEntry<'a>>),


Why is the Box type necessary here? PD is similar to the existing ledger-objects.

I'm concerned that using Box will weaken some of the memory-safety guarantees of concrete Rust types

Removed in bc2f1f8. The Box was only silencing the large_enum_variant lint. Replaced with #[allow(clippy::large_enum_variant)] on XRPLRequest — same pattern already on XRPLResult.

ckeshava · 2026-06-24T22:51:34Z

 pub mod escrow_cancel;
 pub mod escrow_create;
 pub mod escrow_finish;
-pub mod mptoken_issuance_create;


Why is this transaction module removed?

Accidental rebase deletion. pub mod mptoken_issuance_create; was dropped from tests/transactions/mod.rs but the file was still on disk — silently uncompiled. Restored in 5594406.

ckeshava · 2026-06-24T22:55:14Z

@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
+// xrpl.js reference: N/A (XLS-80 is a new feature)


xrpl.js also has tests for PD. Here is the source code: https://github.com/XRPLF/xrpl.js/blob/main/packages/xrpl/test/integration/transactions/permissionedDomain.test.ts

Cross-referenced in db4eb3a. Two gaps closed: Flags == 0 assertion on new domains, and deep-equal between account_objects entry and ledger_entry node — both matching the xrpl.js lifecycle test.

ckeshava · 2026-06-24T22:56:39Z

+// Scenarios:
+//   - base: create a new PermissionedDomain, verify tesSUCCESS
+//   - account_objects_filter: filter by type=permissioned_domain; verify exactly 1 object
+//   - ledger_entry_by_index: query domain by its ledger hash
+//   - ledger_entry_by_account_seq: query domain by owner account + sequence
+//   - update: replace credentials on existing domain (KYC → AML), verify KYC absent


Since there is so much in common between these two integration test files, merging them into a single file will make for more readable code

Done in db4eb3a. Merged into tests/transactions/permissioned_domain.rs. Delete test now uses the shared kyc_credential/new_pd_set helpers. Single pub mod permissioned_domain in mod.rs.

Adds LedgerEntryType::PermissionedDomain (0x0082) with Owner, AcceptedCredentials, Sequence, OwnerNode (SoeRequired), PreviousTxnID, PreviousTxnLgrSeq, and Flags fields. OwnerNode typed as non-optional String per rippled SoeRequired constraint.

Validates: - AcceptedCredentials list must be 1–10 entries (temARRAY_EMPTY / temARRAY_TOO_LARGE) - CredentialType must be even-length hex string, max 128 chars (64 bytes) - Duplicate (Issuer, CredentialType) pairs rejected — comparison is case-normalised to uppercase to match rippled behaviour - Issuer must be a valid classic XRPL address - DomainID (when updating) must not be all zeros

Validates DomainID is present and not all zeros.

…elete in transaction enum

Adds PermissionedDomain enum with two lookup variants: - Index(hash) — 64-char hex string validated - Object(account, seq) — account validated as classic address, seq within u32 range XRPLRequest::LedgerEntry variant is boxed to satisfy large_enum_variant lint. Imports ToString and alloc::format for no_std compatibility.

Unit tests: - Serde roundtrip for Set and Delete - Validation: empty creds, duplicate creds, invalid issuer, bad hex CredentialType, zero DomainID, oversized list, ledger_entry invalid index/account Integration tests (against xrpld standalone): - Full lifecycle: Set → account_objects → ledger_entry by index → Delete - ledger_entry lookup by account+seq - Error codes: temARRAY_EMPTY, tecNO_ISSUER, temARRAY_TOO_LARGE - PermissionedDomainSet update (change credential list)

…ealth status Docker container health reflects the container state, not whether xrpld has finished loading the ledger. Poll the RPC endpoint directly so integration tests only start after xrpld is ready to serve requests.

Integration tests reference AccountObjectType::PermissionedDomain for account_objects filtering in permissioned domain tests, but the variant was missing from the enum.

- Add Model::get_errors() validation to PermissionedDomain ledger object (owner address, 1..=10 credentials, per-credential validation) - Fix seq field type u64→u32 in PermissionedDomainObject (XRPL sequences are u32; removes unreachable runtime range check) - Add all-zeros rejection to PermissionedDomain::Index validation (consistent with validate_domain_id in permissioned_domain_set) - Fix dead _expected assertion in ledger_entry test; switch to typed assert_eq - Swap misplaced doc comments between validate_domain_id and validate_credential - Fix duplicate credential error to include issuer/credential_type pair - Add bounds assert to with_credential() (XLS-80 cap is 10 entries) - Fix test_default to assert empty AcceptedCredentials fails validation - Replace positional CommonFields::new() calls with struct literals (CLAUDE.md) - Add eprintln! to silent temDISABLED skips in integration tests - Fix 66-char domain_id test fixture (trim to 64 hex chars) - Remove unused ToString import from ledger_entry.rs

… tests PermissionedDomains is always enabled in standalone mode; conditional skips are unnecessary and mask test failures.

…ector rippled validates XRPL state data server-side. No other ledger_entry selector performs per-field validation on the values it passes through — the PD selector was the sole exception. Remove the address and index checks to match the established convention and avoid false confidence from client-only guards.

Box was added only to silence the large_enum_variant lint. Every other XRPLRequest variant is unboxed; the indirection breaks idiomatic Rust ergonomics at the API boundary with no memory-safety benefit. Replace the Box with an allow attribute on the enum, matching the pattern already used on XRPLResult.

The two files shared wallet setup, client init, and helper functions. Merging into permissioned_domain.rs makes the full lifecycle readable as a single file and eliminates duplicated boilerplate. Changes: - Move all tests from permissioned_domain_set.rs and permissioned_domain_delete.rs into tests/transactions/permissioned_domain.rs - Route the delete test through the shared kyc_credential/new_pd_set helpers instead of its inlined PermissionedDomainSet struct literal - Drop the temDISABLED early-return guard from the delete path (PermissionedDomains is always enabled in standalone mode — redundant guard masked test intent) - Add Flags=0 assertion (xrpl.js parity: newly-created PD has Flags=0) - Add ledger_entry deep-equal vs account_objects assertion (xrpl.js parity: assert.deepEqual(pd, ledgerEntryResult.result.node)) - Replace two mod entries in tests/transactions/mod.rs with single pub mod permissioned_domain

…dation Follow-up to the multi-stream review of the XLS-80 PermissionedDomain models. - Replace the with_credential builder's assert! (panic on the 11th credential) with unconditional push; the 1..=10 bound is already enforced non-fatally by get_errors, so a library builder no longer aborts on caller input. - Extract validate_accepted_credentials (count bound + per-credential validity + case-insensitive duplicate detection) and call it from both PermissionedDomainSet and the PermissionedDomain ledger object so the two validate under identical rules (the ledger object previously skipped the duplicate check). - Reuse validate_domain_id in PermissionedDomainDelete instead of duplicating the len/hex/non-zero check inline, keeping the rule in lockstep with PermissionedDomainSet. - Add the missing unit coverage: ledger-object get_errors (valid, invalid owner, empty list, duplicate, over-limit), case-insensitive credential dedup (4b5943 vs 4B5943), and DomainID wrong-length / non-hex rejection on the Set path.

e-desouza force-pushed the feat/xls-80 branch 2 times, most recently from b4669b1 to 2906cde Compare June 23, 2026 23:42

Patel-Raj11 reviewed Jun 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread tests/transactions/permissioned_domain_set.rs Outdated

ckeshava reviewed Jun 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Patel-Raj11 previously approved these changes Jun 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

e-desouza added 13 commits June 25, 2026 18:17

feat(domains): add PermissionedDomainDelete transaction with validation

b45d99f

Validates DomainID is present and not all zeros.

feat(domains): register PermissionedDomainSet and PermissionedDomainD…

e2557f0

…elete in transaction enum

fix(models): add PermissionedDomain variant to AccountObjectType

834b61b

Integration tests reference AccountObjectType::PermissionedDomain for account_objects filtering in permissioned domain tests, but the variant was missing from the enum.

test(permissioned-domain): remove temDISABLED guards from integration…

a47b4e0

… tests PermissionedDomains is always enabled in standalone mode; conditional skips are unnecessary and mask test failures.

e-desouza dismissed Patel-Raj11’s stale review via 3c8667e June 25, 2026 22:19

e-desouza force-pushed the feat/xls-80 branch from db4eb3a to 3c8667e Compare June 25, 2026 22:19

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

feat: add PermissionedDomains support (XLS-80)#331

feat: add PermissionedDomains support (XLS-80)#331
e-desouza wants to merge 14 commits into
mainfrom
feat/xls-80

e-desouza commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jun 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ckeshava Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

e-desouza Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ckeshava Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

e-desouza Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ckeshava Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

e-desouza Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ckeshava Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

e-desouza Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ckeshava Jun 24, 2026

Uh oh!

e-desouza Jun 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

		@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
		// xrpl.js reference: N/A (XLS-80 is a new feature)

Uh oh!

Conversation

e-desouza commented Jun 23, 2026

Summary

New transaction types

New ledger entry type

Shared types

Validation

Registration

CI

Test plan

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jun 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

codecov Bot commented Jun 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading