Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Sep 19 21:38
    gitcoinbot commented #1303
  • Sep 19 13:05
    mcdee commented #1356
  • Sep 19 12:13
    ericsson49 opened #1409
  • Sep 19 12:11
    ericsson49 opened #1408
  • Sep 19 10:11
    mcdee commented #1183
  • Sep 18 00:03
    gitcoinbot commented #1303
  • Sep 17 17:00
    djrtwo closed #1351
  • Sep 17 17:00
    djrtwo commented #1351
  • Sep 17 15:00

    djrtwo on v08x

    Network specification update Adds chunked responses to the R… Apply Danny's suggestions and 8 more (compare)

  • Sep 17 15:00
    djrtwo closed #1404
  • Sep 17 14:03
    CarlBeek synchronize #1361
  • Sep 17 14:03

    CarlBeek on carl-keys

    Simplify keystores. No longer r… (compare)

  • Sep 17 13:43
    CarlBeek synchronize #1361
  • Sep 17 13:43

    CarlBeek on carl-keys

    Specify Bech32 encoding of PubK… (compare)

  • Sep 17 08:29
    hwwhww labeled #1404
  • Sep 16 19:54

    djrtwo on dev

    Update 1_custody-game.md Fix t… Update 1_custody-game.md Update specs/core/1_custody-gam… and 2 more (compare)

  • Sep 16 19:54
    djrtwo closed #1407
  • Sep 16 19:26
    djrtwo synchronize #1407
  • Sep 16 17:41
    CarlBeek synchronize #1361
  • Sep 16 17:40

    CarlBeek on carl-keys

    Improve readability of SSZ type… make nil-count randomization wo… Update libp2p networking spec and 29 more (compare)

Piper Merriam
@pipermerriam
@prestonvanloon don't take this a gospel but my understanding is that disk io is still the bottleneck after fast sync completes (as block processing is bound by disk io)
James Ray
@jamesray1
RFC: SPECTRE and PHANTOM by Aviv Zohar and Yonatan Sompolinsky. https://medium.com/@avivzohar/the-spectre-protocol-7dbbebb707b5, https://www.coindesk.com/spectre-creators-propose-phantom-blockchain-protocol/. I just read these articles, I haven't had time to read the papers yet. I see parallels between the discussions we have had on DAG design and voting. Thanks @ChosunOne for suggesting to read this.
James Ray
@jamesray1
Eli
@elihanover
Can anyone point me to any discussions on modifying the VMC to allow for varying gas limits for shards? As there can be up to 1 collation per shard per period, why not grant certain shards a higher gas limit and allow their collators to submit collation headers anytime up to a few periods later? If we keep the collators' performance requirements between shards proportional and increase the collator's reward proportional to the gas limit, this shouldn't sacrifice decentralization and would allow for higher gas txns without changing the period length. Thanks.
Philippe Castonguay
@PhABC
@JustinDrake Is there any plan to push the random beacon thing with the RANDAO to be at the L1 protocol level directly? Not only sharding would benefit from this.
By this I mean whether the random values will be accessible by smart contracts once inplemented.
James Ray
@jamesray1
Yes the RANDAO beacon chain will be in protocol.
@elihanover CTRL+F gas here: https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Sharding-FAQ, or search on Https://ethresear.ch.
Shameless plug: Take a look at Drops of Diamond (@DropsOfDiamond): https://twitter.com/DropsOfDiamond.
ChosunOne
@ChosunOne
I'm preparing to implement local storage for Drops of Diamond, but I want to clarify a few things first. The current Minimal Sharding Protocol Spec doesn't have a lot of detail on the structure of collation bodies except that they are of a fixed size. What is the current consensus on what a collation body should look like? Does the description in blob serialisation still describe what a collation body should look like?
Preston Van Loon
@prestonvanloon
@ChosunOne Blob serialization link you provided is the most recent and current update as far as I know. We’re almost done with implement of that serialization strategy on our repo if you want to take a look.
prysmaticlabs/geth-sharding#92
ChosunOne
@ChosunOne
Thanks Preston!
Preston Van Loon
@prestonvanloon
Sure! I’d imagine you could store collations however you like and serialize them when you need it
It would be hard to query serialized collation bodies, if you ever desired to do so
James Ray
@jamesray1
Hmmm, which is faster:
       if self.data.len() % CHUNK_SIZE != 0 {...}
       if 0 < self.data.len() && self.data.len() < CHUNK_SIZE {...}
self here is a chunk struct
ChosunOne
@ChosunOne
They aren't equivalent, if length is greater than chunk_size, you get invalid results.
James Ray
@jamesray1
Ah I was getting mixed up with recursively serializing a blob larger than a chunk.
Eli
@elihanover
Can anyone explain why the collator reward is not transferred to the collator's coinbase in the VMC itself? I've looked at multiple sharding manager contracts and this never seems to be done
James Ray
@jamesray1
@elihanover collators won't be used any more, see https://ethresear.ch/t/minimal-sharding-protocol-extension/1823 and Drops-of-Diamond/diamond_drops#13.
I'll be talking with Mikhail @mkalinin and Dmitry from Harmony about sharding on Wednesday 9 am UTC time. I'll post a Zoom link here at that time.
Eth-Gitter-Bridge
@Eth-Gitter-Bridge
<vbuterin> I'm doing an analysis of RANDAO exploitability right now
<vbuterin> the naive version carries an 8% penalty
<vbuterin> as in, if an attacker has portion k of all stake power, then their ability to revert chains is generally equal to what it would be in a PoW chain if they had k+0.08
<vbuterin> this is assuming 1s latency and 6s skips
<vbuterin> but if we add a 2/2 notarization committee.....
Eth-Gitter-Bridge
@Eth-Gitter-Bridge
<vbuterin> ah sorry, it's a bit more than 8%
<vbuterin> in any case, the 2/2 notarization committee is effective at cutting down this gap
<vbuterin> an attacker with 43% has roughly equal ability to revert confirmations between RANDAO and a PoW chain
<vbuterin> an attacker with ~46% can revert unboundedly (ie. 51% attack)
Tim Siwula
@fluffypomeranian
🤔
Eth-Gitter-Bridge
@Eth-Gitter-Bridge
<vbuterin> Here are the raw results:
Basic tests

Probs at 0.40: [1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5]
Probs at 0.38: [1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.99, 0.99, 0.99, 0.99]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.499497483376521, 0.4995812361040185, 0.49964105949546395, 0.49968592704588577]
Probs at 0.36: [0.9500000000000001, 0.9500000000000001, 0.9500000000000001, 0.93, 0.9, 0.87, 0.86, 0.85]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.48717948717948717, 0.49358868961792784, 0.4957256629282115, 0.4954644561058209, 0.49473216914012735, 0.4941976743445504, 0.49461367659907257, 0.4949214581088842]
Probs at 0.34: [0.9, 0.86, 0.85, 0.8200000000000001, 0.8, 0.72, 0.71, 0.68]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.4736842105263158, 0.481156068211217, 0.48646006702951833, 0.4875993598276201, 0.48884467389832675, 0.48631574873990197, 0.48777064277847154, 0.4879503809867171]
Probs at 0.32: [0.65, 0.5700000000000001, 0.55, 0.53, 0.49, 0.43, 0.38, 0.36]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.393939393939394, 0.43019405471412786, 0.4503444684787027, 0.4604031996489284, 0.46439288287540686, 0.4648924469736185, 0.46549834399285367, 0.4681167185810241]
Probs at 0.30: [0.34, 0.3, 0.29, 0.27, 0.23, 0.17, 0.16, 0.13]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.2537313432835821, 0.353889367864523, 0.39828291417880685, 0.41888960615844745, 0.42704074053470786, 0.426700442627961, 0.4349219307153144, 0.43658642383617907]
Probs at 0.28: [0.19, 0.14, 0.09, 0.08, 0.08, 0.04, 0.03, 0.01]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.1596638655462185, 0.2722857426481327, 0.30945925654226203, 0.3471858705905822, 0.37633216760826327, 0.3690069652560282, 0.3773205326101883, 0.35993500019711494]

<vbuterin> ```
Requiring 2/2 notarization

Probs at 0.45: [0.9400000000000001, 0.93, 0.91, 0.89, 0.85, 0.79, 0.77, 0.76]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.48453608247422686, 0.4909296585613643, 0.4921414239050566, 0.4927171515914589, 0.491874768868764, 0.4901794992103987, 0.49066662842746356, 0.4914246895117101]
Probs at 0.44: [0.7000000000000001, 0.65, 0.58, 0.47000000000000003, 0.43, 0.33, 0.3, 0.26]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.4117647058823529, 0.44635935665672855, 0.4547303777432507, 0.4529506977013847, 0.457901403117792, 0.4539367094184753, 0.45710666077733214, 0.45800313058768144]
Probs at 0.43: [0.59, 0.54, 0.45, 0.38, 0.34, 0.29, 0.23, 0.18]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.37106918238993714, 0.42358026703250745, 0.43384778359877485, 0.43981916275360505, 0.4462678058924705, 0.44860407741298053, 0.4477035362964303, 0.4466167874791011]
Probs at 0.42: [0.29, 0.2, 0.13, 0.1, 0.08, 0.06, 0.05, 0.05]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.22480620155038758, 0.30901699437494745, 0.33624487391395963, 0.35993500019711494, 0.37633216760826327, 0.38487620901988556, 0.3946131509296685, 0.4074621919375194]
Probs at 0.41: [0.14, 0.08, 0.05, 0.03, 0.01, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.12280701754385964, 0.2204812092115424, 0.2692212086040889, 0.2938746460782852, 0.2847472489508014, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0]
Probs at 0.40: [0.08, 0.04, 0.04, 0.01, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.07407407407407407, 0.16666666666666669, 0.2548408459681007, 0.24025307335204213, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0]
Probs at 0.39: [0.08, 0.06, 0.01, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0]
Standard race equiv rate: [0.07407407407407407, 0.19675422795565725, 0.17725503036342635, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0]
```

<vbuterin> Probs = probability of attacker reverting X blocks
<vbuterin> Standard race equiv rate = "That same result would have been achieved in a PoW chain if the attacker had this much hashpower"
<vbuterin> "at 0.xx" = "attacker has 0.xx stake power"
James Ray
@jamesray1

:chuckles:, I remember you saying at the workshop that RANDAO was not subject to a 51% attack while BLS was, now you're saying that it is.|

What do the different indices indicate? Why are they all the same at 100% chance for 0.40, while they differ for others?

James Ray
@jamesray1
What do you mean by 2/2 notarization? Is that a meta-committee in the main shard and another committee in each shard?
James Ray
@jamesray1
Does each index correspond to the number of blocks that would be reverted?
James Ray
@jamesray1
How come the standard race equiv rate goes up then down as the indices increase for stake powers 0.43 and less?
James Ray
@jamesray1
For RANDAO this could be handy, what do you think? https://github.com/zweicoder/RNGesus
James Ray
@jamesray1
Eth-Gitter-Bridge
@Eth-Gitter-Bridge
<vbuterin> > <jamesray1> :chuckles:, I remember you saying at the workshop that RANDAO was not subject to a 51% attack while BLS was, now you're saying that it is.|
<vbuterin> I don't recall saying that
<vbuterin> aaah I see
<vbuterin> ok, the question basically is, how much can 51% do
<vbuterin> in a BLS system, the 51% can arbitrarily select whatever value they want at zero cost