Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Spec for staking module differences - #1220
Conversation
|
Codecov ReportAll modified lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #1220 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 56.08% 56.07% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 63 63 Lines 6820 6820 ==========================================
- Hits 3825 3824 -1 - Misses 2606 2607 +1
Partials 389 389 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| Rollkit will support customizable functionality for verifying the correctness of a block proposer. However, it currently works by delegating this functionality to the Application, by checking that the `AggregatorsHash` of a header corresponds to the `NextAggregatorsHash` of the previous, where setting the `NextAggregtorsHash` is the responsibility of the ABCI Application. | ||
| ## Assumptions and Considerations |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should include here our assumptions around how tendermint staking works.
This would allow auditors to better verify our assumptions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"tendermint staking" does not exist. the ABCI App simply sets the validator set
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, we use the staking module for that.
nashqueue
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This spec aims to check how we use the staking module vs. how it is used in tendermint. Please elaborate on that.
| Rollkit will support customizable functionality for verifying the correctness of a block proposer. However, it currently works by delegating this functionality to the Application, by checking that the `AggregatorsHash` of a header corresponds to the `NextAggregatorsHash` of the previous, where setting the `NextAggregtorsHash` is the responsibility of the ABCI Application. | ||
| ## Assumptions and Considerations |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, we use the staking module for that.
don't we use it in exactly the same way? |
nashqueue
commented
Oct 5, 2023
The point of this spec is to exactly figure this out and to make sure to capture the nuances if there are differences. |
As of #1291, we decided that Rollkit vA will control the proposer entirely, ignoring all validator set updates from the ABCI app. This is being implemented in the |
closes#1220 Instead of #1220, we'll just fix and update the block_spec. Also adds the termination condition, and processing out-of-order rollup blocks from DA. <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a requirement for blocks to have a valid signature from the centralized sequencer. - Implemented support for out-of-order rollup blocks on the Data Availability network. - Added a termination condition for sequencer double-signing scenarios. - **Documentation** - Updated block specification documentation to reflect new validation rules. - Added diagrams to illustrate out-of-order block handling and termination conditions. - **Refactor** - Removed `AggregatorsHash` and `NextAggregatorsHash` fields from block headers to streamline the validation process. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Connor O'Hara <connor@switchboard.xyz>
closes#1220 Instead of #1220, we'll just fix and update the block_spec. Also adds the termination condition, and processing out-of-order rollup blocks from DA. <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a requirement for blocks to have a valid signature from the centralized sequencer. - Implemented support for out-of-order rollup blocks on the Data Availability network. - Added a termination condition for sequencer double-signing scenarios. - **Documentation** - Updated block specification documentation to reflect new validation rules. - Added diagrams to illustrate out-of-order block handling and termination conditions. - **Refactor** - Removed `AggregatorsHash` and `NextAggregatorsHash` fields from block headers to streamline the validation process. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Connor O'Hara <connor@switchboard.xyz>
No description provided.