Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ethereum Core Devs Meeting 121 Agenda #379

Closed
timbeiko opened this issue Aug 20, 2021 · 9 comments
Closed

Ethereum Core Devs Meeting 121 Agenda #379

timbeiko opened this issue Aug 20, 2021 · 9 comments

Comments

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator

timbeiko commented Aug 20, 2021

Meeting Info

Agenda

@lightclient
Copy link
Member

lightclient commented Aug 22, 2021

Can we discuss EIP-3756: Gas Limit Cap please?

@holgerd77
Copy link

Some additional note: link from above is not working yet, EIP is currently contained in the following PR: ethereum/EIPs#3756

@mkalinin
Copy link
Contributor

Proposing to continue discussion on https://hackmd.io/@n0ble/consensus_api_design_space if we have a time during this call

@ai-slave
Copy link

🗓 Calendar link, just so less people (that are lazy like me) miss this important event.

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@mkalinin yes, we absolutely will. Hopefully the Geth team have their write up ready :-)

@poojaranjan
Copy link
Contributor

@fjl
Copy link

fjl commented Sep 2, 2021

Here is the Geth writeup about the merge sync: https://github.com/fjl/p2p-drafts/blob/master/merge-sync/merge-sync.md

@shemnon
Copy link
Contributor

shemnon commented Sep 3, 2021

Followup on last week's discussion on EIP2046 -

I brought this up as the scope of precompiles is growing for L2 and alt-eth chains. In particular nearly all L2 chains have at least one system precompile to initiate exits back to L1.

The proposal was to make this proposal impactful by making the whole range "warm". Martin pointed out this would re-open the broken metre attack.

After thinking about it for two weeks I think the way forward may be to re-open EIP-1109, which is a PRECOMPILEDCALL opcode, that would fail if it called anything but a precompile, and mix it with EIP-2046, which wanted to reduce precompile costs but not make them zero. The proposed fee would be the same as all other CALL series for warm calls, and any call to a non-precompile (as determined by the chain, so hard forks and other-chain additions like L1 exit precompiles would adjust that set) would fail consuming all gas.

As far as when... the next "open" hard fork. It's not important enough to drive a hard fork and not essential to the merge. I posted this to F.E.M. as well. Considering the timing issue I don't think it needs to be discussed in this meeting but I want to put a bug in peoples minds for when the next feature fork happens. If someone has a good reason why it won't work (like undoing Berlin security fixes) please post it to the FEM thread.

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

timbeiko commented Sep 3, 2021

Closed in favor of #384

@shemnon I'd recommend pasting your comment into the next call's agenda given we didn't have time to discuss 2046 today.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants