From a00eca59ad7f8aa0d68cc2c89d71082e0469af21 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Fran=C3=A7ois=20Garillot?= Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 18:28:51 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] fix: make dollar signs go away --- doc/src/learn/architecture/consensus.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/src/learn/architecture/consensus.md b/doc/src/learn/architecture/consensus.md index c9ab28b14e515..8ba7dfacf3a64 100644 --- a/doc/src/learn/architecture/consensus.md +++ b/doc/src/learn/architecture/consensus.md @@ -29,9 +29,9 @@ The [Tusk consensus](https://github.com/MystenLabs/narwhal/tree/main/consensus) A Narwhal instance sets up a message-passing system comprised of a set of $3f+1$ units of stake divided amongst a set of nodes, and assumes a computationally bounded adversary that controls the network and can corrupt parties holding up to f units of stake. The validators collaborate in forming a leaderless graph of batches of transactions - which the literature (in the context of DAG-based consensus) designates as _blocks_ and that we label as _collections_ - to emphasize we're in a context where the mempool data is used by an unspecified consensus algorithm. -The graph's *vertices* consist of certified collections. Each valid collection signed by its validator-author must contain a round number and must itself be signed by a quorum ($2f+1$) of validator stake. We call those $2f+1$ signatures a _certificate of availability_. Furthermore, that collection must contain hash pointers to a quorum of valid certificates (that is, certificates from validators with $2f+1$ units of stake) from the previous round (see Danezis & al. Fig 2), which constitute the *edges* of the graph. +The graph's *vertices* consist of certified collections. Each valid collection signed by its validator-author must contain a round number and must itself be signed by a quorum (2f+1) of validator stake. We call those 2f+1 signatures a _certificate of availability_. Furthermore, that collection must contain hash pointers to a quorum of valid certificates (that is, certificates from validators with 2f + 1 units of stake) from the previous round (see Danezis & al. Fig 2), which constitute the *edges* of the graph. -Each collection is formed in the following way: each validator _reliably broadcasts_ a collection for each round. Subject to specified validity conditions, if validators with $2f+ 1$ stake receive a collection, they acknowledge it with a signature each. Signatures from $2f + 1$ validators by stake form a certificate of availability that is then shared and potentially included in collections at round $r + 1$. +Each collection is formed in the following way: each validator _reliably broadcasts_ a collection for each round. Subject to specified validity conditions, if validators with 2f + 1 stake receive a collection, they acknowledge it with a signature each. Signatures from 2f + 1 validators by stake form a certificate of availability that is then shared and potentially included in collections at round r + 1. The following figure represents five rounds of construction of such a DAG (1 to 5), with authorities A, B, C and D participating. For simplicity, each validator holds 1 unit of stake. The collections transitively acknowledged by A's latest round in A5 are represented in full lines in the graph.