►
From YouTube: EIPIP Meeting #23
A
All
right,
I
think
we're
live
hello,
everyone
and
welcome
to
eipip
meeting
number
23..
We
have
a
few
agenda
topics
today.
A
The
first
two
were
ones
that
lite
client
put
in
so
instead
of
us
going
to
those
first
until
light,
client
shows
up
we'll
skip
them
and
then
we'll
we'll
have
them
at
the
end,
regardless
of,
if
he's
here,
for
anyone
to
comment
on
so
we'll
start
with
eip
repo
cleanup
item
number
three:
what's
that
one
about.
B
B
I
mean
already
taken
care
of
a
major
part
like
if
any
ip
is
old,
either
redundant
is
mentioned
there
or
it
is
closed
after
certain
period
of
time,
but
we
realized
that
eips.ethereum.org,
they
have
this
list
of
eips
and
they
are
still
in
the
same
status.
Even
though
the
issue
is
closed
on
issue.
Npr
are
closed
on
github
the
status
are
not
getting
changed
for
eips
and
I
was
doing
a
quick
analysis
of
what
are
the
eips
and
statuses.
B
So
it
basically
a
list
all
the
eips
that
and
those
are
present
in
eips.ethereum.org
and
it
lists
a
total
of
312
eips.
B
So
in
the
sheet,
if
you
can
go
to
tab
number
two
pivot
table
two,
you
may
be
able
to
find
the
list
of
eips
divided
on
categories,
and
if
we
give
it
a
look,
we
see
that
there
are
229
draft
status
vips
there
out
of
312.
B
B
B
Unfortunately,
it's
not
a
very
big
success
so
far
like,
even
if
we
have
asked
them
to
change
it,
it
is
still
in
the
same
status
for
a
while.
So
I
was
wondering
what
could
be
the
dr
right
next
step
to
you
know,
move
forward
and
we
should
be
able
to
move
all
the
eips
in
the
right
status.
A
Yeah
we
can
be
proactive
if
we
want
or
just
leave
them
stagnant,
it's
kind
of
whatever.
If
someone
wants
to
take
that
initiative
upon
themselves,
they
can
for
sure
and
contact
authors,
but
whether
or
not
it's
like
really
necessary,
I'm
not
sure.
C
I
would
say
if
we
have
authors
agreement
to
market
as
abandoned,
I'm
personally,
okay
with
just
doing
the
the
actual
pr
to
do
that.
As
long
as
we
have.
You
know
credible
belief
that
the
author
actually
agrees
like
normally
the
normal
process
would
be.
The
author
sets
to
abandon.
But,
like
I'm
okay,
if
the
author
says
like,
if
you
contact
the
author
on
discord,
they're
like
yeah
market
is
abandoned,
like
I'm
personally,
okay
with
using
that
as
agreement,
I
don't
know
about
others.
B
Yeah,
actually
I
was
coming
to
that
point.
Like
you
know,
we
are
reaching
out
to
authors,
I
mean
like
I
have
been
reaching
them
to
for
for
some
of
the
other
tasks
and
during
the
discussion
for
some
of
the
eips
comes
out
that
it
is
not
valid
anymore.
B
I
was
wondering
if
it
is
okay
for
me
or
brent,
or
anybody
who
is
in
touch
with
that
author
to
just
create
a
pull
request.
By
that
you
know
we
can.
We
are
also
giving
the
opportunity
and
not
I
mean.
First
of
all,
we
are
creating
the
pull
request
because
we
have
data
we
have
reached
out
to
the
author
and
we
have
their
permission,
but
in
case
of
you
know,
verification
of
that.
B
If
we
create
a
pull
request,
we
give
like
say
14
days
time
for
arthur
to
respond
back
if
he
does
not
want
it
to
be
withdrawn,
or
he
has
changed
his
mind
or
something
like
that,
then
he
can.
You
know
mention
that
as
a
comment
and
after
that,
we
would
like
to
mark
that.
As
with
john,
the
only
concern
that
I
found
there
was,
if
any
of
the
cathodes
are
taking,
that
step,
they
would
be
added
as
a
contributor,
I'm
not
sure
if
it
is
like.
A
Yeah
or
we
could
just
say
that
you
don't
have
to
be
a
contributor
to
to
do
a
pr
for
someone
else,
which
really
do
you
have
to
be
added
as
a
contributor,
if
you
do
a
pr
for
someone
else's
vip,
or
is
that
just
more
like
common,
like
that's
what
commonly
happens.
A
B
B
Right
so
I
was
thinking
I
mean,
I'm
not
sure.
Maybe
you
can
help
me
understand
this
part
like
if,
if
I,
if
I
go
ahead
and
create
a
pr
for
any
eip,
which
I
have
information,
that
arthur
has
mentioned
that
he
is
not
willing
to
pursue
it
anymore.
I
I
my
understanding
is
like
I
would
be
added
as
like
contributor
to
that
once
that
pr
is
accepted,
but
that
pr
is
accepted
at
this
state
of
withdrawn.
So
in
my
mind
it
should
be
fine.
Just
wanted
to
raise
it
as
like
ethical
concern.
D
Like
if,
if
an
if
an
author
yeah,
if
you
do
a
pr,
then
an
editor
still
is
going
to
be
the
one
that
has
to
merge
it
so
there's
which
is
which
makes
that
totally
fine.
If,
if
an
if
an
eip,
I
just
want
to
go
through
like
the
different
cases
where
I
think
this
would
make
sense
like
if
an
if
an
eipp
author,
if
you
talk
with
them,
they
say
yeah,
I'd
like
to
withdraw
the
cip
or
make
it
withdrawn.
D
Then
you
making
the
pr
for
them
and
then
just
mentioning
that
that
the
author
said
that
it
could
be
like
that.
The
author
could
always
refute.
Did
that
happen?
So
it's
not
really
that
big
of
an
issue
if,
if
someone
was
doing
it
wrongly
because
the
author
could
just
come
back
and
say,
wait
no,
never
mind
that
wasn't
the
case
and
or
if
the
author
says
like
to
whatever
really
status.
That
makes
sense.
D
E
D
Yeah
yeah,
and
so
if
they
say
that
but
like
even
so,
if,
if
I
talk
to
someone
and
then
I
hear
from
them
that
I
don't
think
that
default
means
that,
then
we
can
make
their.
We
can
withdraw.
Oh
yeah,
of
course
like
they
have
to
say
that
they
want
that.
They
allow
us
to
like
explicitly
say
that
they're,
okay
with
us,
moving
their
eip
to
withdrawn.
It
shouldn't
be
like
assumed
or
or
something
like
that.
A
Yeah
that
sounds
good
and
then
just
to
make
sure
I'm
clear
on
this
pooja.
What
you're
saying
as
far
as
being
a
contributor,
you
would
do
a
pr
that
would
attach
your
name
to
the
eip,
but
not
like
actually
write
it
down
as
a
contributor
to
the
eip
right,
like
as
an
author
or
anything
yeah
yeah,
okay,.
C
C
B
So
if,
if
there
is
a
general
agreement
on
this,
I
may
have
a
list
of
eips,
for
which
we
have
already
requested
the
author
to
change
it
or
they
they
have
agreed
somehow,
but
maybe
in
in
absence
of
a
bandwidth
or
higher
priority
job
or
something
like
that.
The
eip
dps
has
not
been
created
yet
so
now
I
can
go
ahead
and
do
that
adding
a
note
to
the
author.
So
if
you
have
like
a
disagreement
with
this,
please
respond
back
within
14
days
or
something
is
that
fair.
C
C
That
would
let
us
kind
of
speed
things
up
a
little
bit.
We
don't
have
to
wait
two
weeks
for
them
to
climb
because,
like
I
said,
they'll
probably
do
it
right
away
and
then
we
can
just
merge
it
immediately.
Sometimes
either.
A
Okay,
let's
see,
do
we
go
on
to
the
next
one
or
do
we
have
any
other
comments.
C
A
Had
to
sneeze
glad
I
put
it
on
mute,
let's
do
item
number
one
handling
retroactive
changes.
If
you
click
on
that
it
goes
to
a
issue
in
the
ethe
1.0
specs,
where
you
said
there
was
no
descent
and
moving
eip
26814
during
all
core
devs
number
101..
The
problem
is:
what
does
that
mean
with
the
separation
of
eips
and
network?
Upgrades
final
doesn't
mean
mainnet.
A
C
C
C
I
don't
think
that
we
need
a
super
formal
process
for
this
set
at
least,
and
I
intend
to
be
hesitant
to
generate
super
formalized
processes
until
they're
needed
in
this
case.
I'd
say
we
just
you
know,
make
mark
prs
or
mark
the
eip
as
final
and
we're
done
like
updating
the
paper.
We
should
probably
do
as
well,
and
you
know
anyone
can
submit
a
pr
to
yellow
paper
to
do
that,
and
I
don't
think
that
would
run
into
any
trouble.
C
D
C
C
C
D
Else
does
well
my
pretty
much
all
the
pre-compiles
that
have
been
added,
since
I
don't
think
are
in
the
yellow
paper.
You'd
have
to
go
to
eips
for
those.
A
B
A
D
A
So
I
guess
my
take,
is
it
shouldn't
be
a
required
to
update
the
yellow
paper
for
it
to
go
to
final,
if
that's
anything
being
suggested,
which
I'm
not
sure
if
it
is,
but
it
should
be
encouraged
if
someone's
willing
to
do
that.
I
guess
and
then
final
doesn't
mean
mainnet,
but
have
we
changed
that
rule
yet
or
have
we
just
said
that.
C
A
A
C
If
there
was
confidence
that
that
was
actually
true
like
this
here
is
the
current
state
of
ethereum
defined
somewhere
again,
that's
yellow
paper
or
purple
paper
or
green
paper
fuchsia
paper
or
some
specs
repo,
like
eip1
specs,
similar
tabs
eip2.
Does
it
maybe
within
wiki
or
something
like
any
of
these?
We
find
with
me,
but
it
would
be
nice
if
there's
a
single
source
of
truth
that
defines
what
it
means
to
be
a
client.
That
being
said,
I
am
way
overworked
and
I
think
all
of
us
are
so.
I
do
not
volunteer.
B
Just
to
add
here
like
in
the
last
meeting,
even
light
plant
also
mentioned
it
as
a
suggestion
like
we
have
spec
of
f2
in
h2
dot
or
spec
repo,
the
current
spec
of
our
clients.
Could
we
have
something
listed
here
in
at
one
dot,
os
pack
for
ethereum
one
dot
or
chain.
A
This
sounds
like
a
really
interesting
thing
to
do,
starting
with
this
next
berlin
hard
fork
and
working
backwards,
so
that
would
fall
into
the
ethe
1.0
specs
repo,
which
generally
falls
under
james's
stuff
but
james.
What's
your
load
like
right
now.
D
Go
ahead,
doing
the
like
putting
all
the
hard
forks
up
and
retroactively
by
putting
in
berlin
and
then
putting
in
all
the
other
hard
forks,
and
these
are
the
eips
and
the
block
numbers
which
would
when
they
came
in.
Like
that
that
stuff,
I
was
already
planning
on
what
I
don't
really
understand.
Yet
is:
what's
the
best
version
of
how
to
keep?
If
if
we
did
keep
something
like
micah
saying
on
ethonospecs,
what's
the
best
way
to
do
that?
That
would
allow
it
to
be
most
likely
kept
up
to
date
and
easiest
to
be
used.
C
Yeah,
the
canonical
problem,
I
mean
a
sufficiently
specific
specification,
is
called
code
and
so,
by
definition,
just
the
gaff
repo
is
arguably
the
eth1
1.0
specs.
So
yeah,
yes,.
C
D
So
something-
and
so
that's
like
what
I
just
don't
know
yet
is
like-
would
it
would
a
list
of
eips
that
are
supposed
to
be
on
mainnet,
be
sort
of
enough
or
would
a
link
to
it
or
with
the
yellow
paper,
like
the
yellow
paper
should
stay,
probably
where
the
yellow
paper
is
because
people
expect
it
to
be
there,
but
there's
some
like
other
things
that
probably
yeah
specs
is
like
the
networking
protocol
stuff
like
the
e364
e65
e67.
C
I
think,
as
a
user
who
has
unhappily
had
to
read
the
yellow
paper
many
times
over
the
thing
that
I
want
that
I
always
end
up
going
to
the
yellow
paper
for
and
then
when
I
get
there,
I'm
like.
Oh,
I
wonder
if
this
is
actually
up
to
date
and
it
makes
me
nervous
is
I
want
a
reference
like
like,
for
example,
gas
costs?
How
much
do
things
cost
in
gas
today?
C
Like
I
don't
actually
know
if
the
yellow
paper
reflects
reality
right
now
it
might,
it
might
be
close.
Maybe
it's
mostly
right,
I
don't
know
and
there's
no
place.
I
can
go
to
get
an
authoritative
answer
to
that
other
than
digging
through
like
the
gaff
or
another
mind
repo
and
trying
to
find
their
gas
accounting
methods
and
maybe
hoping
they
have
like
a
constants
list
somewhere
in
the
repository
like
those
are
the
types
of
things
that
I
really
would
like
to
see.
C
Similarly,
data
structures
for
the
for,
like
the
structure
of
a
block,
it's
like,
I
can
go
to
the
yellow
paper
and
try
to
parse
that
out
of
the
mathematical
notation
or
I
can
you
know,
try
to
go
on
stack
exchange
and
try
to
find
someone
who
has
defined
what
a
block
is,
but
that's
probably
out
of
date
by
now,
and
so
now
I
need
to
find
another
one,
and
so
I
end
up
like
trying
to
put
together
all
these
pieces
of
sources
of
truth
where
okay,
here's
the
yellow
paper,
but
it's
out
of
date,
the
stack
overflow
has
slightly
more
update
or
easier
to
read
information,
but
it's
out
of
date
and
then
the
nether
mind
repo,
you
know,
defines
blocks,
but
they're
kind
of
spread
out
over
17
different
files,
and
so
all
I
wanted
to
do
is
figure
out.
B
C
If
there
was
an
authoritative
place
that
I
could
felt
like,
I
could
trust
that
is
a
up
to
date
and
be
human,
readable,
yellow
paper
kind
of
half
meets
up
to
date
and
does
not
make
a
human
readable
in
my
opinion,
and
then
all
the
other
sources
don't
make
the
up
to
date
or
don't
make
it
readable
again.
I
do
not
have
time
for
this.
I
recognize
this
is
potentially
a
very
large
task,
and
so
I
do
not
want
to
put
it
on
anybody.
C
One
potential
place
is
the
eth
wiki.
It
is
the
third
place
that
I
go
to
look.
I
don't
know
who's
maintaining
that,
but
it
has
some
good
info,
but
it's
not
always
accurate.
It's
not
updated.
Maintainership.
D
B
C
A
Okay
sounds
good
in
that
case.
If
we
are,
are
we
done
with
this
topic
that
got
a
little
bit
of
on
the
tangent,
but
that's
good
because
we're
going
to
bring
it
back
in
the
next
few
meetings
about
this.
A
C
So
this
we
can
maybe
speed
through
this
one.
If
you
don't
mind,
yeah.
C
So
exec
took
a
politically
correct
approach
to
this
problem
and
started
with
an
issue
and
filed
it
and
got
responses,
and
then
I
forgot
about
it
and
then
I
went
and
took
a
more
let's
say,
bold
approach
to
this
exact
same
problem,
and
I
just
submitted
a
pr
to
make
this
change.
No
one
said
no
to
it
after
two
weeks
and
like
client
said
okay,
and
so
I
merged
it.
C
Okay,
I
later
realized
that,
just
now
that
I've
forgotten
this
issue
was
created-
and
I
don't
know
if
that
was,
I
probably
should
have
let
him
do
it
the
correct
way,
rather
than
the
bold
way
but
yeah.
So
it's
already
done.
Basically.
D
C
Okay,
I'll
update
that
that
issue
and
close
it
okay.
A
Oh
man,
item
number
four
is
missing:
everything's
broken
the
world's
over,
never
mind
we're
gonna
go
to
number
five
single
source
of
truth
for
eip.
What
was
this
one
about.
B
Okay,
so
a
few
meetings
back,
we
we
discussed
that
there
are
too
many
sources
for
eip
like
we
have
eip,
read
me
github
and
then
eips.eden.
and
then
epdm.org
so
brent
volunteered
to
get
this
information
at
one
place.
B
I
think
he
left
some
messages
on
this
card.
He
was
like
proposing
to
have
a
google
doc
to
list
all
of
the
following
sources
of
eip
truck
where
we
find
like
duplicates
are
available.
I'm
not
sure
he
is
in
the
meeting
today
to
explain
that
further
but
yeah.
If
anyone
happens,
oh
thanks
for
joining
brent.
Sorry,
I'm
late
no
way.
B
E
Okay,
cool
yeah,
I
I
put
I
posted
on
the
peeps
and
eeps
the
proposal
to
create
a
google
doc
to
to
coordinate
and
list
all
of
the
single
sources
of
or
all
the
non
all
the
sources
of
truth
that
are
all
have
lots
of
duplicates
and
then
some
proposed
solutions
and
list
of
issues
and
build
consensus
to
make
sure
there's
consensus
around
the
fixes
and
and
and
then
once
we
have
that
set
up.
Then
we
can
push
forward
to
making
that
happen.
E
But
anyway,
if
everyone's
on
board
with
that
or
then
I'll
go
ahead
and
push
forward
with
that
and
get
get
involved,
listing
all
the
issues
and
proposing
solutions
and
stuff
like
that.
So
if,
if
anyone
has
any
other
additional
sources
of
truth
or
any
other
ideas,
yeah,
so
that's
the
plan
anyway.
E
Okay,
yeah
I'll
be
creating
that
document
and
start
listing
the
issues
and
proposing
solutions
and
well
I'll
see
if,
like
we
can
pull
everyone,
that's
involved
on
board.
E
One
question
I
did
have
is
the
the
guy:
is
it
jason,
the
the
guy
that
works
with
the
foundation?
That's
responsible
for
that
site?
What's
his
name?
Is
I'm
pulling
up
my
notes
here?
Sorry,
I'm
kind
of.
B
Oh
sam.
A
B
B
So
I
I
haven't
heard
about
the
first
point
part
the
eip,
editor
rules
and
responsibilities,
but
it's
in
submitted
the
second
blog
that
is
for
eip
status.
The
question
that
we
were
trying
to
get
answer
to
last
time
was:
is
cat
hurt
and
medium
the
best
place
to
publish
that
blog,
or
should
it
go
to
somewhere
else,
and
he
was
supposed
to
reach
out
to
james,
because
james
was
not
there.
Yesterday
I
mean
in
in
the
earlier
meeting,
but
today
I'm
not
sure
excellent
is
not
here
so
yeah.
D
B
All
right,
I
just
have
shared
the
blog
in
chat,
I'm
in
the
link
that
is
submitted
to
the
categories
medium.
It
is
not
published
here.
It
was
just
a
thought.
Come
suggested
by
lifeline
that,
because
this
is
of,
like
you
know,
might
mean
higher
visibility
or
something.
So
we
should
first
check
out
the
chains
because
he's
the
network
coordinator
right
now
so
yeah.
B
D
A
Okay,
great
number
seven
is
review
action
items
from
the
previous
meeting.
Unless
oh
do
we
have
anything
else
on
the
blog
stuff?
I
guess
we
should
wait
for
edson
to
make
a
final
decision.
A
Okay,
so
the
decision
items
that's
what
we're
going
over.
Are
we
going
over
action
items
yeah
action
items?
The
only
one
is
edson,
will
contact
james
to
decide
where
to
publish
the
eip
status
blog.
So
that's
just
one
we're
waiting
on
so
that'll
be
rolled
over
to
the
next
meeting.
A
Also,
what's
two
weeks
from
now
is
that
a
holiday?
No,
it's
not
technically
a
holiday.
Is
there
anyone
who
won't
be
here
for
that
you
get
holidays.
B
A
Okay
well
yeah,
then
that
means
there's.
I
think
what
is
three
or
four
as
a
quorum
for
these
kind
of
meetings,
so
we'll
go
ahead
and
have
that
in
two
weeks
on
december,
30th
at
1500,
utc,
yeah,
1500
utc
anything
else
from
anybody
before
we
close
the
meeting.
E
Did
someone
have
the
sam
richards
contact,
I'm
not
seeing
that
yet?
Did
I
miss
that
or.
B
C
A
That
is
awesome
great
job,
especially
especially
to
you
micah,
you
kind
of
did
the
bulk
of
that.
I
feel
like,
if
not
like,
client
two.
B
Okay,
but
but
I
just
got
one
question
in
my
mind:
I
know
I
mean
it's
not
a
question.
New
question
for
people
like
bart,
has
already
closed
my
earlier
hardcore
retrospective
that
we
did
as
information,
so
I
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
time
to
move
it
to
eip.
I
mean
like
f1,
dot
or
spec
repository
now.