►
From YouTube: Ethereum Core Devs Meeting #76 [2019-11-29]
Description
A
You
hey
everybody
and
welcome
to
today's
core
developer
meeting.
It's
number
76
and
this
one
might
be
a
short
one
today.
We're
gonna
see
because
we
only
have
a
few
agenda
topics.
So
the
first
one
is
the
Istanbul
hard
fort
community
call
a
networked
lava
from
the
etherium
magicians
came
up
with
the
idea
to
have
a
Istanbul,
hard
fork.
Community
call
next
Wednesday
at
2:00
p.m.
A
UTC,
so
the
exact
same
time
as
the
core
developer
called
it's
on
Fridays,
but
this
would
be
on
Wednesday
and
it
would
be
a
live
stream
where
various
people
involved
in
the
Istanbul
hard
fork,
various
core
devs
and
community
members
and
others
would
be
on
for
a
little
bit
for
questions
about
Istanbul
and
just
kind
of
talking
about
the
hard
fork
process
and
pretty
much
whatever
else
we
want
to
do.
We
can
kind
of
make
it
what
we
want,
so
we're
open
to
suggestions.
If
you
go
to
magicians,
you
can
leave
suggestions
there.
A
Anybody
who's
normally
on
the
all
core
dev
calls
is
welcome
to
be
on
the
actual
call,
rather
than
just
sign
in
to
the
live
stream
and
we'll
be
taking
questions
on
the
etherion
magicians
forum
and
on
reddit
and
probably
on
twitter.
So
a
lot
like
a
hashtag
or
something
so
we'll
see
how
this
goes
and
yeah.
That's
pretty
much
all
for
that
announcement.
Are
there
any
comments
or
questions
about
it?.
A
Okay,
next
up
on
the
agenda,
we
have
the
ice
age
hard
fork
and
there
is
a
comment
made
both
and
zoom
and
on
the
issues
page
for
the
quartet
meeting
76
that
show
the
EIP
and
the
proposed
meta
EIP
so
we'll
discuss
today.
If
we
want
to
go
forward
with
that,
I'll
go
ahead
and
hand
it
off
to
James
are
hard
for
coordinator
to
have
him
kind
of
walk
through
it
and
all
that
stuff.
A
C
C
A
C
A
C
A
B
B
There
is
something
called
the
ice
age
built
in
that,
after,
after
a
certain
blocks
at
increments
up
and
at
some
point
it
starts,
it
starts
to
affect
block
times,
which
is
been
happening
on
the
network
for
the
last
three
weeks
about
and
so
to
update
that
we
have
to
push
back
the
ice
age
in
the
clients
which
is
fairly
trivial
to
do
and
then-
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
we
are
today.
We
can
start
with
e
IP
two
to
three
eight
four,
which
is
we
getting?
B
Let's
get
consensus
on
how
far
to
push
the
difficulty
bomb
back.
We
discussed
pretty
extensively
on
Gitter,
but
I'd
like
to
just
hear
from
people
here
that
we
have
an
option
of
pushing
all
the
way
back,
which
is
9,000
blocks
back
or
what
we
did
last
time
was
3,000
blocks
back
three
million
blocks
back
this
time.
It
would
be
five
five
million
blocks
back,
which
is
about
as
far
back
as
we
can
go.
F
E
E
Other
proposals
have
been
to
replace
the
difficulty
calculation
with
something
else,
maybe
something
linear
or
yeah
whatever
it
hasn't.
It's
been
kind
of
vague,
but
something
else
and
a
third
suggestion
has
been
to
basically
immediately
remove
the
difficult
bomb
and
before
we
discussed
the
particulars
on
23
84
I
would
just
like
to
hear
if
there's
anyone
present,
who
feels
that
no,
we
should
not
do
it
like
we've
done
previously.
We
should
instead,
the
one
of
these
other
more
yeah
not
done
before
options.
G
The
question
is,
which
is
riskier
and
which
is
less
risky,
because
from
my
perspective,
up
until
now,
we've
delayed
the
ice
age
twice,
so
delaying
it.
A
third
time
is
kind
of
like
a
no-brainer
effort.
So
just
do
the
exact
same
thing
that
we
did
previously
modify
one
parameter
and
done,
whereas
with
the
other
two
we
have
the
question
mark
of
how
involved
it
is
and
does
it
have
any
or
does
it
pose
any
risks
that
we
haven't
haven't
been
thinking
about.
So
I
guess
that's
kind
of
what
we
need
to
discuss.
Yeah.
E
A
I
had
a
question
about
that
Martin.
Would
it
be
possible
for
us
to
roll
it
back
now,
because
that's
the
one
that
we
know
works
so
we
wouldn't
have
to
do
testing
on
it
I'm
guessing
so
I
guess
two
questions.
If
we
do
things
like
disable
it
or
change
it
to
a
linear
formula,
how
much
testing
would
we
have
to
do
and
then
second
question?
A
E
I
mean
we
could
definitely
change
to
difficult
the
formula
at
the
at
the
next
hard
work.
Whenever
we
want
regarding
how
much
testing
yeah,
we
probably
have
to
do
quite
a
lot
of
testing,
but
the
thing
is
the:
if
we
do
it
like
we've
done
previously,
there
is
already
I
mean
there
are
already
it's
pretty
easy
to
generate
tests
for
this
I
mean
that
if
up
and
a
couple
of
hours
later,
I
had
produced
test,
vectors
and
I
think
must
be
she
or
another
mind.
One
of
them
verified
that.
Yes,
it's
got
the
same
result.
E
B
And
I
also
want
to
remember
that
in
the
get
er
chat
it
came
up
that
the
ice
age
is
also
somewhat
of
a
changes
to
that
should
also
be
brought
to
the
community
a
little
bit
more
than
we
have
with
this
opportunity,
because
we
have
to
act
more
quickly
to
get
a
change
out
so
doing
what
we've
done
previously
is
already.
What
the
community
has
has
approved
and
any
further
changes
should
takes,
should
take
some
more
time
and
some
polling
to
make
sure
we
understand
the
values
for
everyone,
I.
A
E
H
H
D
H
B
B
B
I
G
A
What
I
came
to
the
conclusion
of
for
my
personal
opinion
on
that,
so
it
would
just
be
doing
a
lot
of
PR
changing
and
I
mean
it
would
open
up
a
vector
for
someone
to
stop
the
process
really,
but
I
doubt
that
would
happen
at
this
stage
in
aetherium.
That
is
a
risk,
though,
but
I
think
process
for
the
sake
of
process
is
stupid.
A
I
For
the
last
call
VIP
is
only
there
was
a
proposal
to
extend
that
feed
to
have
separate
feeds
for
each
of
the
statuses,
but
the
only
one
which
exists
Israa
last
call-
and
his
argument
was
that
if
something
is
moved
into
last
call
that
could
show
up
in
the
RSS
feed-
and
maybe
some
new
people
gonna
be
notified
about
it,
and
they
could
find
some
issue
this
late
in
the
process,
I'm
just
replying
or
proxying.
His
argument.
G
B
Yeah
and
I
missed
Oracle
ecori
IPS
haven't
gone
through
the
last
call
process.
I,
don't
know
if
that
was
meant
to
happen
or
if
it
just
sort
of
happened
and
the
new
IPs
the
eligibility
for
inclusion
having
the
RSS
feed
a
better
way
of
doing
what
last
calls
trying
to
do,
I
would
say,
is
having
the
RSS
feed
pull
out.
A
IPS
that
are
marked
is
eligible
for
inclusion,
so
community
members
know
to
look
at
those
as
the
core
devs
have
already
looked
at
them
and
took
taken
that
seriously.
A
F
I
E
A
I
Yeah
yeah
I
can
do
that.
I
guess
the
only
remaining
question
that
is
the
only
one
he
marked
this
last
call
is
the
gas
reduction
for
the
coal
data
bytes
and
everything
else
is
miked
final
already:
oh
yeah
I,
don't
think
it
will
be
and
pragmatically
we
would
need
to
mark
all
of
them
last
call
just
so
that
it
shows
up
and
then
mark
all
of
them
final.
I
I
F
B
B
B
Or
nine
million
two
hundred
thousand
that
it's
right
before
block
time
should
be
hitting
25
30
seconds
which
should
be
is
in
quotes
because
I
don't
know
exactly
what
the
next
increment
will
be.
It
could
be
at
some
point
the
block
time
start
doubling,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
we've
hit
that
part
point
yet
right.
Now
it's
about
15
second
block
times
from
looking
at.
B
B
I
G
B
C
I
G
G
That's
not
the
reason
I
mean
and
specifically
want
to
spill
it
out
is
because
we
have
at
least
we
have
this
fork,
ID
thing
that
we
created
a
while
ago
which
tracks
which
Forks
are
applied
as
which
blocks,
and
that
means
that
if
we
apply
an
no
op
fork
on
rinkeby,
for
example,
that
does
not
do
anything
then,
even
though
it
functionally
the
network
is
the
same
as
before
the
fork.
Id
will
change,
because
it
thinks
that
something
was
upgraded.
H
H
G
E
B
E
H
H
So
there
are
test
cases
that
cover
this,
that
Martin
put
together
to
make
sure
everything's
zero
below
then.
But
if
you
know
the
concern
of
why
we
did
just
do
block
fifty
billion
for
the
Ice
Age
was
we
were
concerned
that
some
clients
might
have
that
floor
incorrectly
and
accidentally
go
negative.
It
was
a
hedge
against
risk.
B
B
G
I
would
vote
against
having
a
different,
lock
number,
because
then
all
of
a
sudden
that
means
that
the
fork
so
the
fork
is
that
will
be
defined
by
its
own
block.
Number
rather
is
also
has
a
parameter,
and
then,
for
example,
gas
does
not
have
a
capability
to
configure
parameters
for
Forks
and
I.
Don't
want
to
add
it
and
I,
don't
guess
rock
so
that
it
looks
at
which
fork
which
network
and
then
do
something
so
I
would.
Rather,
if
we
keep
it
dumb
and
simple.
E
I
E
B
G
So
I
would
kind
of
argue
that
if
you
want
to
release
something
out
Roxanne,
then
let's
pick
a
block
number
that's
about
a
month
at
least
out,
there's
absolutely
no
value
from
a
testing
perspective,
but
there's
no
point
to
break
people's
does
not
work
just
just
because
we
want
to
so.
Let's
try
to
keep
it
a
bit
stable.
E
E
E
B
A
E
B
B
A
H
K
B
I
A
A
A
A
L
E
H
So
concerned
about
the
discourse
of
Michael
one
later,
when
we
talk
about
delaying
the
difficulty
bomb
or
eliminating
it,
people
who
want
to
eliminate
it,
they
call
it
climate
change
deniers,
because
it's
gonna
blow
up
and
I'm
just
accused
about
secondary
name-calling.
They
would
go
on
with
it.
Yeah.
A
B
L
A
A
G
H
H
E
A
B
How
do
you
say
it
like
a
declaration
of
intention
to
fix
part
of
what's
happening
so
either
to
make
it
something?
That's
easy
to
model
to
effective
the
network
and
easy
to
predict
when
it
occurs
so
I
think
that's
something
we
should
look
at
as
a
group
in
the
next
few
months
or
so
I
felt
it
was
important
to
include
so
as
a
response
of
hey
the
blog
signs
are
getting
along.
What
are
we
gonna
do
about
it
for
next
time.
B
M
M
M
Also,
there
is
a
file
in
a
test.
3
poem
called
peer
log,
so
you
could
see
what
does
a
recent
updates?
The
pull
request
done
to
the
repo
so
see?
Maybe
there
was
some
new
test
audits
you
could
run.
For
example,
there
was
a
new
team
wallet
test
and
also
a
keystore
test
for
my
crypto
file
and
some
difficulty
tests
added
recently
so
yeah
just
track.
The
peer
log,
dot,
Indy
file
and
develop
branch
was
at
a
stripper.
E
Anybody
else,
yes,
so
I
served
in
the
old
quarter
channel.
We
now
have
four
EBM,
some
fussing
and
I
just
checked
and
it's
done
435,000
executions.
So
that's
a
pair
to
give
and
Alice
and
never
mind
who
has
all
implemented,
lists
and
adjacent
outfits
and
tracing.
So
they
can
run
state
tests
and
outputs
traces
which
are
then
compared
between
each
other.
Every
step
of
the
execution,
and
so
the
stack
values
are
compared,
not
the
memory
contents,
but
stack
values
and
the
operations
and
the
gas
counters
and
the
resulting
stay.
E
A
A
K
A
The
etherium
improvement
proposal,
the
EIP
IP
meeting,
hasn't
happened
yet
I
was
waiting
until
we
had
the
etherium
cat
heard
her
call
to
talk
about
what
we
were
gonna
do
more
and
we
had
that
call
on
Tuesday,
so
I'll
try
to
plan
for
the
meeting
as
soon
as
I
can
plan
for
it.
But
then
the
date
for
that
will
be
out
a
little
bit.
A
A
J
A
A
B
J
B
E
A
A
A
Two
weeks
from
now
will
be
December,
13th
and
we'll
have
a
meeting
then,
and
then
we
probably
will
skip
the
meeting
after
that,
because
it'll
be
Christmas
week
unless
we
really
want
to
have
a
meeting
on
the
27th.
That
kind
of
depends
on
what
you
all
want
to
do,
but
some
people
will
be
traveling
I
know,
and
we
can
just
be
thinking
about
that.
We
can
decide
that
next
meeting
and.