Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
FRC-0051: Create FIP: Adding (Synchronous) Consistent Broadcast to EC #527
FRC-0051: Create FIP: Adding (Synchronous) Consistent Broadcast to EC #527
Changes from 7 commits
04733aa
2d42338
2fd39b7
9632551
2d6c40e
bfafa75
ed8a967
47984cb
bc4b4f0
d7dff9d
1ee580b
f5cc477
54da4a1
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
see reasoning here feedback welcome
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indeed, one reason for choosing the synchronous CBcast option was the fact that it is not "consensus breaking" (does not cause a fork even if not all miners adopt it -- in classic blockchain terminology). Hence, it can also fit as an FRC.
What is important to notice is that the security of the entire network improves when more SPs adopt it. Therefore, I suggest that even if it goes to the FRC track, it would be implemented in the next network upgrade in order to boost adoption.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't have strong feelings but would like to clarify this in principle. Beyond the inconsistency addressed in #552, there's the fact that FRC, by analogy to Ethereum, has an application-layer connotation (which is also true of the existing FRCs).
We all agree this isn't consensus breaking. The questions are:
Provided that we're consistent about this, I don't see an issue with it being an FRC. But, as Guy said, the security of the network is improved by a large majority of nodes implementing CB, and so it would be preferable to attain community consensus on the direction even if it's fully interoperable.