Ethereum Foundation Core Devs, 13 Jul 2018

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Ethereum Core Devs Meeting #42 [07/13/18]

Description

Agenda: https://github.com/ethereum/pm/issues/50

A

A

Check-Check: okay, yeah: the audio is working hoorah.

B

I think we're gonna great.

A

Hi everybody welcome I'm gonna, pull up the agenda, but we were just talking about. He was them and basically what was the question someone had like? Should we implement it before sharding and all that stuff yeah like? Should he wasn't be available in Maine that somehow so is anyone from uoit's I'm here to like kind of give an opinion I could if.

C

You can hear me yeah. What's up, it's Alex or exit yeah, just.

D

Reflect to the questions from Peter, we.

C

E

F

C

Curie was on test net and Peter mentioned multi clients.

G

Port in depth so.

C

G

Have CPP TM is our.

H

Main client at the moment, but there is work.

C

H

To support material, which I think is fairly it's.

C

H

To completion at.

I

This point, and so the test is hopefully gonna.

C

I

Both CPP theorem and to its hiriam and.

C

Then, as regard to whether it could be introduced on the main net before that, we.

J

Have a proposal in progress which would.

C

Offer a subset of D was to be considered for the mainland and that subset could be used to write pre.

K

C

D

Which are written speaking parts today to.

C

G

Them, as was in contract.

C

H

It would still because it's a subset if they still require consensus, to decide.

E

C

E

If we take them onto the network or not,.

C

Could be like an.

L

Intermediate step.

C

L

I guess we could even achieve kind of games and simplicity because we could basically force all the existing freaking piles to be river. Isn't a specific pieces of Watson code.

C

L

We we actually.

M

Have those rewritten the.

C

The benefit of this from the.

H

Wasn't side would be that.

C

H

Restricted set, so we may not need to address some of the concerns which have arisen.

C

I

And we could still research them because.

C

I

Up recompiles, which would be combined.

C

I

Wasson would.

C

I

C

Other older client.

L

Developers that need to be consensus around them. There is no risk of random.

L

This is nice because then we can make Zuko happy about Blake. We can make the elements and so on and cohab I adding finite field operations. So you can use our purification, a bunch of things.

G

L

Like en SP compiles.

G

L

Ones are those again: oh you mean like there in the weird hash functions that are in signature schemes that people, because, like the traditional DNS system, uses them yeah yeah, there's one other one that people curve to five five, one nine I think people wanted.

C

D

Proposal is currently being.

I

Worked on because there are a couple of different options to be explored and one of the options is whether.

C

I

Should have its own wintering rules and if it does.

C

It would have to be only written, it wasn't because it's specific to a zone, but if.

I

H

You have this random metering logic we have followed so far for compile and.

C

It would be possible to.

H

For clients to decide that'll be able to use this single written in wasn't.

I

Or they could just keep writing their own version of baking pies, but.

C

I

Haven't reached decision which.

C

I

Makes more sense and wanted to get a bit more detail on these before we.

C

I

Proposed this to this whole, but.

C

I think we really hope to.

D

C

D

Like a proper proposal like two.

C

H

C

Be discuss cool.

A

That sounds good if anyone on youtubes hearing an echo, it's because I'm in a really weird conference room where I'm not familiar with the settings so sorry in advance, I'm, just gonna try to mute when we're not talking cool, so I guess what came from that is. You said in two more meetings from now acts if you're gonna have something.

C

If you already have an issue be put to discuss this, and everybody is welcome to check it out and yeah I mean personally, I would be happy to discuss this even on the next polar the collator. But we wanted to get some more.

D

Detail from our side before.

C

We propose it, but yeah I don't mind better. Where do we keep discussing it on the next ball.

A

Okay, sweet: let's get to the agenda unless anyone had anything else with that.

A

Cool first off is Demetri here for testing.

A

Okay, we'll skip testing for now. Then, let's just run through client updates, real quick, I guess I.

D

Know we don't really have any specific updates last week during the to meet up policies.

G

Like tying polishes, we're trying to figure out a way like times to be able to sync.

D

To the change faster, etc, so we're mostly.

I

Hiking a lifetime stuff and no.

D

Dilemma: August cool.

A

E

We are planning a major release very soon.

A

Okay sounds good at Harmony.

J

A

J

A

Activities this weekend, starting.

J

To work become training since Monday, so yeah. That's it pretty excited about going on research.

A

Cool Trinity.

D

I

Major release architecture that we're working on for plugins to be able to host a third party functionality that kind of excited about, but in the very early stages, but generally working on synching logic. It's sort of still a lot of the core functionality.

A

Cool C++ aetherium.

A

Paul you have a CPP, aetherium, update or I think you're muted. If you're trying to talk.

A

Okay, we could skip for now Pegasus. What's up with you guys.

H

On here, I'm here with Ben, you all know and Matt Halpern, one of the quartet's working on Pantheon. Thanks for having us to talk about Pantheon today, I'm very excited to announce that Pegasus is planning on releasing our Molinet compatible with Pantheon at DEFCON 4. So some of the details around it are that the client will meet the requirements of a well behavior here, so it'll be able to synchronize the entire chain through all the hard Forks, mind blocks and propagate pending transactions.

H

The client will also be developer for friendly, supporting common app development like truffle and web 3 and deployment news cases. This also means that the client will support JSON RPC ap is used by the popular clients such as at net debug admin, but well yet have technologies such as whisper or swarm as we're focusing on core functionality, robustness and modularity we'll be providing more information and insight with what, where we're at in the coming weeks, and we're also planning on being more active in the community, such as providing feedback on the attorney reference tests.

H

N

Running web programming, programming, language, written Pantani's, written.

H

N

H

N

H

L

Congratulations thank.

H

You thanks for listen, yeah.

A

Sure thing cool: do we have anyone from Nimbus or mana or any other things turbo gas.

F

One of the last things to test we work.

I

Everything again.

K

F

The database like I'm.

I

Using now is a very.

F

Supportable to what we actually need in turn, I mean I've gone to some database research and I found some data structures I'm not going.

I

H

Go into the details here.

L

F

So I'm getting close.

A

Great update from a wasum, you kind of gave one earlier axe ik. But if you have anything else to add.

C

H

C

K

Else we still plan to to release this test net.

C

K

We don't have a final date on that, yet it's hopefully is good for Def Con anyway,.

G

The doctor, the evolvement open.

K

Challenge, if anyone out there was right and.

G

K

Our token in their language.

C

Code, it's true Daniel, thanks for reminding.

I

C

I

B

Of a 20 token,.

C

Feature subset.

I

Of ownership 20 token, which can be implemented in any language, compiling to Lhasa and they're all ready for.

C

Implementations.

I

One can see one.

C

O

One in a subscript M, a rest version.

C

I

C

I

Any language of choice in them and.

C

We can test all of.

A

C

A

A

Hope no one's using that if you're out there on the internet and using that stop it there's better things all right. So that's cool that it's good, a that's! That's good that we're getting it officially! Deprecated thanks, Martin.

A

That's funny, okay, so we'll get to research updates. Now oh yeah go ahead. Peter from.

D

The missus team here yeah.

A

um I didn't I, didn't see anybody I didn't see anyone from aetherium j/s either. Is there anyone from mist here.

D

Anyway, so it's not just.

A

I

Update and I'm not sure whether they don't.

D

I

D

I

B

Release a while ago, which.

D

B

When you start of mystical tomatoes, it basically connect students work when.

D

B

Starts up and then switches over to the.

D

I

Annotations thinking so.

D

That should be a really really.

I

Nice update or anything using weather.

D

But they told this an important meeting or not. That is not done here. We go. Oh yeah.

A

They haven't mentioned it on a for deb meeting, but I did see they had a release like a week or two ago about that. It was like right after their last for deaf meeting. So that's really cool yeah.

D

Now we're actually getting fuck-fuck reports.

A

D

I

D

Works and they see their.

I

D

I

They stock up, yet they don't.

A

D

A

Nice, um okay, so for research, the talaq! Do you want a leader? Do you want Danny to start with ornate or anyone else? Well,.

L

Vlad, Nate and I have been arguing about chain for service rules a bit basically trying. You know the gem the place where we stopped as like just like this is already getting into optimization territory, but trying to figure out like what are these issues where well Nick sure does sorry just to kind of dial back a bed mobility. We look Justin and I am at Burley and started thinking about one issue which is that like, given that using like pretty much every random beacon scheme has its own flaws of different kinds.

L

So what look, for example, ran'tao has like exploitability the threshold VRS and have this like hard threshold online requirement and VDS and have to worry about, and they have a high chance of being monopolized in all those things. So we're basically trying to see go back a bit and see. Can we make the algorithm, like the the beacon chain, algorithm itself, more resistant to like a high level of a manipulation of proposal? Selection? The basic arguments here is that, because the a tester sets are very large, it's just basically statistically impractical to.

L

Even if you have perfect control over the random see, it is statistically infeasible to really manipulate like more um even one a tester set. But the number of proposals in one epoch is like 100. So that's totally manipulable and if you have, if you can perfectly manipulate the randomness, so the issue, the thing that we're trying to figure out is: can we modify the algorithm to be kind of much more robust against proposers and being really unreliable and the security assumption? Is that, like worst-case?

L

Imagine that within one epoch there's only like one or two proposals? That are honest and we think that we can, but it basically requires some fortress rule modifications. So the problem with the old fortress rule was that the old fortress rule was very kind of proposer centric and that accounted by Heights and proposers have this large power to basically prevent Heights from incrementing or false Heights to increment and the scheme that we're looking at basically move either.

L

Well, one option that I, like I'm thinking about is moving fully to something goes to like, and one option is moving out of. Partial weight is something that partially in the ghost direction, the idea being, basically that these kind of like base. If you have like chain a and then on chain a proposers, just stop showing up, then you have all of these dangling at the stations and can we make the dangling at the station still contribute to that?

L

I like you can to the head score so that, even if you have missing proposers for a very long distance and then some other chain starts growing, that other chain still can't overtake the original unless it has more than 50% and then at the same time also trying to see how that fits into media.

L

Finality gadget and budget justification and I kind of all of all of those details so making progress but still wants to think a bit more and also thinking about knowing making like the design space between sort of FFG style algorithm to see this new style algorithms and what the differences are and what the intermediate points are. And so forth,.

A

Cool any other research updates or comments. Oh.

G

Yeah, we also have a guru, I'll.

A

G

Meant for the call, but.

A

We're gonna do it like I, don't.

G

G

A

Cool anyone else, so we also have some questions on the agenda. So basically because the IP 1011 the hybrid caste perspect, was now deprecated.

A

Is there still interest to have a joint test net like a Rob Stinson test, some of this new stuff, maybe ewaz um and other things? That's the first question. The other ones are, if there's an interest in this effort, how would it looked like if there's not a hybrid Kasper proposal and what stem should we take to in the meantime, while Casper and sharding is still being developed, so the first.

I

Question is basically.

A

Yeah, what should we have a joint test that.

D

Wow, okay, let me ask a different question: joint. That's that's! For Casper.

A

Let me see how I made that comment. I feel.

L

Like if it's in the ultra short term like a couple of months- and it should be a joint test that just for was um if it's some longer-term like if it's longer-term to the point where the beacon change details were solidified, then a joint test set for the beacon cherry would be really cool. Yeah.

A

I think, if you want to this.

I

D

But feature-wise.

D

I

We don't have a.

O

Gas shortage to the test program.

L

D

L

Of all, we could distinguish between Casper and Casper was shorting because, like the beacon chain for the Casper was shorting, thing can totally by itself be used as a single as a single chain. Casper set up.

G

That thing using the hamster contractor right, I'm not suggesting about that.

A

Okay, so yeah, it sounds like what there's not gonna be a shared Casper test net until we get much further down the line. So the next, the successor to Rob Stinson, look.

D

A

D

I guess my point is that maintaining the consensus engine.

I

Is gonna work because.

D

Small quirks, and so it's completely.

I

Fine to do it if you, if it have to the fly mass effect, but it's just a.

A

Temporary thing yeah and it sounds like it's more of a temporary thing cool.

A

So what was the other questions on there? I think there was like so it sounds like we are interested in an effort for a successor to rob Stan. It sounds like if we were to do that. We want kind of something like he wasn't to be put in there and I know that, there's being an e wasn't s net developed right now is that is that basically, exactly like the main chain that with wasn't.

D

A

Is it different that.

D

A

Currently has two courts that bother me personally.

I

One of the perks.

D

I

D

They removed the code size limit, which is probably.

I

It was on contract, require.

D

G

Larger fruit sizes, but that's that's a bit problematic point because.

D

Well, essentially, that's.

G

Also, denial of service attack back there on the transaction.

I

D

It's we can't just.

I

Allow arbitrary large.

L

D

C

C

So it's not only the code size.

M

C

M

Together with another change, where we don't.

F

G

Zero bytes in.

C

Transaction data anymore, yeah.

D

C

I, don't really understand why.

D

So basically, network.

I

Traffic is compressed, and the storage on this is compressed, meaning that unless you.

D

Have alternating.

I

Zero one zero one: it should be able to.

D

Compress it fairly well, so why why did you guys decide to change the pricing? Thank you. I mean.

C

The zero bytes was.

K

Also one of the key attack vectors because it.

C

Doesn't matter it's compressed I.

C

Mean that's an implementation detail that.

I

Were it's compressed or not, but.

C

You definitely can have.

I

An alternation of zero ones or.

C

K

C

K

C

K

C

Anymore, right.

L

Well, no, it still can be compressed because, like if a zero makes up, 50% of the compression like in compression algorithm, that's remotely close to optimal, will assign zero to the zero byte to be like less than one bit. So the like, you should not be able to make something whose compressed value is like more than twice as long for per gas than just random bytes I.

D

N

So the exact changes are probably be late to go and.

M

What's problem data but.

D

M

Time, currency to debate.

N

I

D

I

D

You want to be a scientist.

I

D

I

Think it would be nice to somehow try to keep the changes the minimum, because any kind of soap changes that don't really make sense. Until you bring too much value, they always pose the risk that somehow they end up being enabled on mania for.

D

I

D

I

J

The parity had drops and that they accidentally leaked out the IP there. So.

D

B

Why I'm afraid of all these tiny tweaks that.

D

Don't necessarily in banner.

A

Okay, so it sounds like we still need more discussion and kind of hashing out of whether or not we're gonna have another test net successor that involves it wasn't or not. I think.

D

B

Have just does.

D

O

Sure that I believe more the.

D

A

D

Achievements, great.

A

So yeah, what were you saying? Danny Oh.

D

G

D

That's not ready to go when we want to do one.

G

That doesn't have.

A

Yeah we can just keep Rob's tempore that or we can make a new one.

F

A

As Rob Stan does anyone know the current state of Rob's turn really it's kind of been flaky lately.

D

B

Kind of like a stepchild I guess thirty specif is mostly koban. Yes,.

D

P

Is mostly wrinkled baby.

D

B

What is the minimum sort of client support that we need for a class time like woody blossom at this particular moment? We only know.

B

D

I guess the point I personally.

L

Would at least like to see.

D

Both Joey, theorem and heretic to agree on respect.

I

Simply because if.

G

D

We introduced some really new yearly.

G

Idea, even without modification that is really hard to integrate when the other one we run the risk of.

K

D

Having the other time so it would be.

F

Nice to at least try to target the mature to try on at the.

D

C

So actually I can regarding the test.

I

Attention on e wasn't.

C

M

C

M

H

Works directly with CP, p, terraeum and.

C

H

C

Which is almost.

M

Finished to have it running it kuwaiti are you, but.

C

It's still a single VM.

D

And next to it, there.

G

Is a separate report.

C

To have a native go interpreter for was and I think it's.

J

Also, like it's.

C

J

A prototype stage.

D

But it's kind of working and.

C

D

Problem, though, with the test.

G

That we are facing is.

K

C

Tyrion doesn't.

E

Support proof authority it.

I

Only supports proof of work so.

C

We have a an option here. Maybe we want to have CPP.

M

C

D

C

Thing that will find support.

D

I

Between healthy and coherent, both of us support, Authority.

D

D

I

You want to do a proper, a scientist, and that is super.

D

C

K

Reflecting to the earlier issue with the code size limit and that's.

H

Of course, discussion, I think.

C

G

To go with that.

C

G

C

The Puri wasn't.

B

C

D

To you have this other shape test that.

K

C

K

Wasn't then, then,.

C

All of these things have to be with you.

D

Yeah I got the point. My point is that for.

I

Several transactions who currently transaction fool is limited to, so the transactions will already feel turns out. That is larger than I. Don't have any 5k and.

D

I

Is that? Because we kind of store about six thousand transactions, multiply that by 25 kilobytes? And you have a nice few hundred megabyte.

D

Memory uses just for a section from itself, so if you, if you just.

I

Do it connects increase on the on.

D

I

D

We're already in the gigabytes.

D

F

Scenario, spammers.

A

Okay, we can take this offline I think as far as coming up with like kind of the details of the. If we were to do a cross client test set a new one that involves II was them, but until then we're gonna have the peer. You wasn't test that is there a timeline for that exit might mention earlier.

C

A

K

A

Sounds good so next up Alexi, can you talk to us about your idea for changing the network ID and Constantinople in order to make things backwards, incompatible.

F

Yes, so it's basically.

F

For the screen separation from rosy on.

M

Classic hard, first and.

F

M

Most of the places don't.

F

Really matter, but the one which is doesn't matter is where we're after.

I

Handshake every point is asking about the doubt: artwork blog and the.

F

Check fix later, and that allows you to essentially separate yourself from the waste in.

B

Classic, although they still using the same network ID the same handshake.

L

F

What I'm suggesting is.

L

F

Have the change.

G

In network ID and actually have a practice of changing network.

B

Id every time would be hard work, so.

K

That we always cleanly.

F

Separate from the previous network, it does have some, so we will be able to remove.

F

K

I

A need to think about this thing if we do.

F

I

Network ID after hard work, then essentially we'll have to disconnect.

B

From all the peers and reform the network, so.

D

That's something to think about yeah.

F

D

F

There's another.

B

F

Suppose the time and you know and I just joined.

I

D

Means that was.

I

I'm thinking of I didn't deserve the network IDs and especially, if I'd be joining currently I missed. I will be on the frontier side of the chain and then.

D

I

To already connect to buy.

D

I

D

F

So yeah I haven't I only just today, I.

D

Realized that there is this complexity about.

F

G

We form on the network.

L

F

Would be nice to to.

M

B

F

B

F

B

Of make words things simpler.

F

I prepare my heart works, so.

D

Currently, the Deaf beauty of protocol supports extending the.

I

Handshaking with arbitrate field.

D

And helix work done, that's really hard for a person for something what we can do.

G

Is that we can.

D

Expand the handshake so that that includes some arbitrary random data.

I

And then peers.

D

Will know whether they.

I

Are understanding.

D

Or not and basically.

I

We don't need to change Network IBD, just.

D

Some as somatic material.

F

Okay, I think I'm, just gonna.

I

Need to think about it more, but I encourage everybody else to also think about that, because.

F

I really I think it would really nice to just make it much simpler there and the attention you have between affords.

A

Thanks Lexi we're finally to Constantinople, so what I want to talk about today was as much as we can get certainly IPS to the accepted state. Even if they're not they don't have every single thing to find get them to where we're like a green team, put them into Constantinople and then start to talk about a timeline.

A

So first off, let's just go through some of the e IPs and make sure we're kind of all in agreement that something with some of these are definitely going in 145 bitwise shifting we approved of that weeks ago, so that one's definitely going in the IP 210 block hash refactoring is another one that I think we all agreed on is going in the I. Don't remember if we agreed on to 10:52 the xt code, hash or not.

A

Does anyone remember.

F

This one I think this one appeared quite recently.

I

So I don't think we did it's.

F

I

Of those which.

F

We did not specifically yeah.

A

This is next about returning the tech act, 256 hash of the contract.

A

Oh Lane are you. uh We asked a question. No, that would not go. Okay, no problem. So let's see we've.

G

Got temple and yeah.

A

So we should put that in anyone. Disagree.

F

Actually about simple and useful.

N

F

D

I'm going to ask just a simple question about the I.

F

D

That it's been being posed in the context of the.

L

Casper contract right, this 210 is completely independent of the Casper contract. 210 is located.

A

Cool so 210 yeah I'm, pretty sure we agreed to tins going in so 1052 straightforward, everyone kind of wants it so I think we should do it. So we'll say right now: it's going in unless someone comes up with a crazy like a reason not to mm-hmm net gas metering, 4s store, I. Think everyone's in favor of that Christian yeah.

F

F

F

H

You need to know with.

F

F

D

G

Thinking works there I.

L

Don't think it's simple as the.

J

L

J

L

About to say the same thing like it's the mean complexity that I see about this is that you don't have to just meet yet attorney Matt, but you also have to maintain a journal for the dirty map and so there's risks involving like what happens if stuff gets reverted. What happens if there was like stuff gets reverted to different depths and then rewritten and so forth and like we had to fight with these kinds of issues, I see what you know two years ago, so my leg ends up I'm reintroducing a lot of trouble.

L

If we're not careful, the other problem is that this, like it does in like it, does definitely increase the complexity of a minimal implementation considerably.

D

Glad a third problem to the issue.

I

D

I

Me much happier.

D

So essentially,.

I

If we reduce the what this.

L

Doesn't reduce it again, transactions which is completely fine, but.

D

L

That it will be a lot happier.

D

L

D

L

Posted it somewhere or Anna's, asking somebody whether they could put.

D

L

Maybe we'd have.

I

To see that, if.

D

I

To roll out this Eid Romania now, then, what could that mean? How many.

D

L

Time so, in the worst case like if we're assuming a daus attacker, then this should not make things worse at all, because the daus attacker would just make sure that you fill in different fields or make sure not to have a transaction that refills the same field anyway with normal usage.

L

Yes, but I guess it would be good to have more metrics on like what actually is marginally contributing to the Uncle Ray door.

L

Like margin, we could share bidding to load on clients the most right now, because it's like to me, it seems weird that blocks are being processed in a couple hundred milliseconds, but the local Raiders are is still over 20 percent and that, like there are some cases where, if, if the block its contents turned become closer to being cure, simple transactions, as we had in December than the local rate, what up to forty percent, even though the gas consumption was the same so like it would be nice to just have I try to do a bit of more detailed analysis and like see what actually is contributing the most and like?

L

Maybe it's not even at point level, maybe there's something happy weird happening at the animals level and.

O

L

I feel like that sort of stuff will be necessary if we were to inform any scale in any kind of short term scalability and permits that we wanted to make.

D

L

Experiment good to do so.

D

I

Concept, I might have, is a.

D

I

L

D

I

D

I

One thing that we try to do is adjust in another four.

D

I

Different machines, different parts of the world and just see.

D

I

Fast, take at the ball because.

D

I

Be exhausting being able to.

P

See whether they are delays in the.

F

M

Do you mean by.

F

Virtual machines now.

D

Basically, you.

G

D

F

Machines on the server or.

D

F

About this as well, and to make it actually much cheaper to do this experiment, I have.

F

H

H

F

H

G

Intro performance, but it does not. It.

F

G

F

D

Don't know the and.

F

D

Of stuff thinking about, and it.

I

Starts basically propagating so maybe the.

F

I

Will be quite tricky cuz you can reroute, you can.

F

I

D

Yeah I guess bakudo. So if.

F

I

Want to use a transformer, you don't wanna, be with mania history, so we can Joseph.

F

Simply be Sparta.

D

H

F

He's down: oh there's, a still kinda useful to the network, because David is somebody.

G

Still has a distinct, complete.

B

F

D

F

K

I automatic experiments.

A

Okay, so that's given that brought up some questions with EIP 1087, so we'll skip that one for now and not say: that's gonna go in or not because we stops a lot of open questions. 1014 skinny create. Is there anything on that? That would be problematic to anybody or stuff that needs to be flushed out. I.

A

Think everyone was in favor of it too.

A

Cool no comments: what.

G

But any word about.

A

Little bit river is just gonna, create you ready, I think so.

A

Yeah actually so Nick commented that it needs a discussion URL, but otherwise it's good so.

F

F

D

My explanation was.

I

Which might not be right if.

F

L

F

L

Only create the contract if it does not exist, arrange so that all of these edge cases out like one or two years ago, because I remember we were just like in.

D

The GUI theorem.

L

Code already has a game already has a cost, but this particular uses.

D

L

I remember well, but there are test cases for the specific use case. There are people interpreted, I'll gable, that's it wrong and I'll get Cod.

A

Cool, so it looks like skinny create two is gonna be going in, so that's good. So the other thing is: do we want to delay the Ice Age whenever we do this for hard fork.

N

F

A

That one more time now.

F

I was wondering.

L

If the italic has done the simulation, I.

F

L

Yet, but we can totally redo it, although.

F

The other thing.

L

Actually, no, we could there's a simpler way to do this. The Ice Age was delayed by three million blocks: correct, correct, okay, there's.

I

L

Do is we can just look at the blog sign chart on ether skin, which I'm going into right now and like in terms of block numbers. It'll be exactly the same. So if we pick up the time at which the ice age kind of starts happening as when the block time reaches say 16 seconds, then that would be, let's see it. June 5th 2017.

L

And I know that we have about 6,000 like right now, but about 1500 blocks they actually no hold on. Do you remember what the what was the Dow hard? Sorry, the Byzantium part for blockers at four point: three: seven million just.

F

L

Know Kieran so 4.3 4.0 4.1 for 3.9 3.8. So the time we have to worry is when the blocks number starts, hitting the 6.7 million range. So that's when it'll like make the first spike opposites, like maybe less than a second up. It's still noticeable so six points. It's.

F

Actually, gonna be new months right.

L

I'm hold on let's check right now. Six point: seven is still pretty far away all right now we're at five point nine. So six point seven is eight hundred thousand from now, and one day is six thousand blocks. So a hundred a hundred thousand box is about seventeen days felt like started about six months or so yeah and then, after that, it'll take another eight months or so until it becomes like really serious, so I'm doing it in Constanta and in Constantinople log seems.

L

A

Okay, anyone else have an opinion on delaying it or not.

D

Questions about.

O

D

A

We can talk about that before we decide on the ice age thing so yeah did anyone else, have a comment before I move on to the timeline, and then we can go back to delaying it. Okay, so.

A

We're talking about timeline and then we're going to go back to talking about delaying after so I put a proposed Constantinople timeline. That's very, very optimistic.

A

It's listed on the agenda, but basically finalizing the EIP is according to the timeline should happen today. The client implementations happen for roughly a month between July 16th and August. 13Th testing would be August 13th to September 10th. The test net would be September, 10th, October 1st, and then we would launch October 8th. That would put us like 20 days before Def Con starts I. Don't think this is necessarily reasonable, but I just wanted to put something down, and then we can start estimating how long it'll take for things.

A

So Alexi had an alternative timeline that he posted as a comment, so I'll go down to that, and that puts us having a launch in January. Most people don't like working during the winter time because they're on, like family vacations and stuff. So that's why I was willing to get it done before Def Con, but I, don't know if that's really feasible now, depending on which ones go in.

F

So my timeline.

A

Is essentially based on the fact that you have to produce the conformance test.

D

For each EAP before before, most of the client starts implementing it. So the idea was that we.

F

D

Reference implementation for each EAP, this one in any client doesn't matter which one.

K

F

K

Death directions among implementation allows you to generate.

M

F

Don't really want.

M

Too many people queue late.

K

Disasters like.

I

F

Once you got conformance.

I

Test then you can.

F

I

The specification because the conformance test might actually.

P

K

Some of the problems and.

F

K

Once you've got conformance test and respect, then you go ahead.

F

Yeah, maybe I mean.

N

I am NOT, saying.

D

I

F

I

Wanted to be to.

F

D

Of work lighting time because.

F

D

The moment it's kind of smear around.

F

Different stages.

G

D

G

So implementing this stuff and creating.

D

G

For it was kind of concurrent.

D

Singing, which is a nice thing or bad thing is the way it happened.

F

Well, I'm, just I'm just consciously.

I

You know the the situation changes over time, so, in the beginning, the.

F

I

Implementers probably had more time to do the stuff, but.

F

Nowadays, everybody's.

D

Easy fighting their own fires and.

F

D

Need to kind of appropriate.

F

For the folks, back with.

G

D

F

With a very little.

D

Chance of it being on implementable before.

F

They seriously start doing it and you know I think we should get to that stage.

A

So I think that that's similar to how we've done it in the past, except we've, done things concurrently, like Martin mentioned so like we are implementing it in clients, while we're creating the test at the same time, having C++ be the first implementation that everyone copies from, is kind of how I understood it. So that's similar to what you put down Alexi and I, like that, you did it the way you did, because my timeline that I put down was kind of waterfall method, where it's like one after the other, whereas really it's more agile.

A

The way we're doing it, where it's kind of things happening concurrently,.

F

Then it could still.

A

G

My timelines to be concurrent, if you, if you look at the this.

F

G

I can go for each et cetera, so you don't have to like.

F

Do it first for the first.

D

A theorem for the second we can actually in currently make.

F

A reference implementations with all the APIs at once and.

G

Introduced ones and.

F

Then you convert somewhere along.

D

The way you might.

B

D

Able you might.

B

Say that, oh you know we're gonna.

A

C

Ahead, could we set a priority list for those VIPs and maybe.

I

Reevaluate, according to those timelines.

C

K

Maybe we select five of the easy ideas right now, but we say for.

C

Example, bit by shifting.

K

C

One block cache is party.

I

To export registry etc, and the.

C

Reevaluate as we go, which one is.

D

From my personal perspective,.

P

I think advice, 50s code, hashes, uniquely.

D

That reveal I. Don't really see why this would pose a problem.

I

D

I

We think could have suffice. A lot has another.

A

A

Yeah I think this is different than previous hard Forks, where we had more like very, very high profile high risk changes. I think it feels like at least like.

L

210 is kind of entering fundamentally new territory, because it's the first thing I knew it like privileged EDM contract that gets called as part of blog processing. But even that is like it's a significant change on the surface level. It's not like a deep change to how the EDM works.

L

D

Great, however, it's not as far Sun.

F

Is still fine lines that we D.

A

For which 1 to 10 I.

D

A

It was final, I are not finalized like technically by EIP standards, but I thought that the that it was written out completely I might.

P

P

A

Yeah, okay, so the talent just needs to go in and have that then right.

F

H

Question I had about to.

H

F

J

Writing is smart contracts in.

K

Basic CED, my.

L

Check I know that I published the I think I published the EVM Anne's. The lol for it like I, feel, like lol, was kind of the appropriate level to write it because it doesn't introduce high level jump. A very complex compiler risk, but it's also readable and.

A

You think you publish that somewhere yeah.

L

G

N

G

L

Oh just serpents in bytecode and I could just treat them all for it. Then yeah.

A

If you can do that, that would help us I guess understand if it's gonna be a little bit more difficult to implement.

L

F

Look it's the type of serpent that seems trivial. You can foretell.

L

F

N

H

D

Because, basically, we need somehow the audience.

F

Choose you so kind.

B

Of water, there is one.

D

Center that will divide.

F

A

Paul, what were you saying, yeah serpent.

I

M

I

M

I

For me to actually move on with this one, because every.

M

I

I propose some change. It's like wait.

M

Forever I cannot like I'm, not.

I

M

To queue them up easily and I don't want.

I

Like move forward in all of the issues at one point.

C

J

One or two feel requests that have.

M

M

O

We were thinking about using.

M

Implementation I do.

M

Some kind of it's.

I

Something that.

O

Is quite close to the.

M

O

Codes by the way do we have test cases for this.

A

Four to ten yeah yeah, that's a good mitri question. Unless someone here knows I remember.

L

M

L

I

Essence not to include.

F

M

Part for the part, without words right.

N

F

Makes it good won't.

N

Work in high-crime testing.

F

P

A

Okay, so 145 is pretty clear-cut, so is 1014 for skinny, create two, so is 1050 for EXT code, hash, I, think and then block house refactoring needs some work and we need to discuss 1087.

D

L

You mean the lowering it for up to curve stuff yeah.

I

L

But like I guess, I would like to see like other. So first of all is a just guess that could that added optimize, the library sported to parity I can't prove, though there are libraries as well and like what about other implementations.

D

What and you have.

P

Some solidity benchmarks or sisterhood I can benchmark with it's really trivial to inject them into just.

L

Run it against all the clients when we were adding IDIA ec pre compose for Byzantium for the first time, we did do the analysis right and we set the forty thousand like and what eighty thousand gasps busted so forth, because we wanted to target like 20 million. Yes, a second right so like there were measurements that we clearly did, and you can just read. You is up within.

L

F

P

People say is that we.

F

A

I'll lane could you meet.

A

N

F

N

A

Okay, so that's something you can do once things are more clear, you're saying.

N

B

Any more clear.

D

So, for example,.

N

K

Stock are part of the trucks I.

D

K

I've had those four months ago.

I

D

I

D

I

So those are kind of a complex interactions really hard to measure individual weight of.

D

Certain emotions.

A

Okay, any other comments.

A

So, judging by how we have how we haven't really gotten exactly what GIPS are going in yet and the timeline is getting closer and closer to DEFCON, it's probably going to be posted EV con before this is released unless we start moving here. So if that's the case, we probably should delay the ice age in my opinion, because by then we'll start seeing some effects in 2019 from what you were saying right for the ice age, okay, so and with the earliest we're gonna get done in late 2018 early 2019.

A

This hard fork is what it's looking like. Does anyone want to push the agenda and make it earlier than Def Con.

F

Perhaps it's worth thinking.

G

About not wanting everything to Constantinople, but simply releasing changes as they are ready. Let's say if.

F

D

F

Shifts are pretty straightforward.

D

And they pretty much ready. Why.

F

P

F

P

Work for the ships I mean what was the biggest problem with.

D

That no that's a key word right, so where's.

F

It coming from you.

D

Have to ensure that.

F

Everybody updated you.

I

Have to test the.

D

Whole thing you have to.

I

L

D

Exchanges, what.

L

D

Want to guarantee.

L

A hard work before Def Con then like I'd, recommend, like probably kicking out to ten, just because, like we're kicking out to ten and seeking out 1087 problem, probably so you have bitwise shifts and thus can agree to NEX decode hash, because those all seemed fairly simple, mm-hmm yeah.

A

So this can kind of be like a little hard fork if we want yeah.

A

What's everyone's thoughts on that, does anyone think that it's worth and it's crappy that Nick's not here to defend, defend his case for the net gas metering 4s store, but I think it was just proposed a little bit too late in the game. It's is what it's looking like, because there's a lot of open questions about it, Wow.

D

A

This is why we are usually suggested that everyone who proposes of four or EHD that easy have around since the language, because.

I

It's easy to argue about so.

D

I

An easy stuff could be a community since.

D

I

Exactly it'll intersect.

P

D

Some of the PRI okay.

N

A

That might be a good future future requirement.

M

L

Think the main practical use cases like one enabling white clients that can sink without literally processing every blog header.

I

L

O

L

Potentially useful right like it would be nice to have a light clients that can sink trust us away in logarithmic time so like if you want to actually achieve that in practice of requires not just the EAP, it requires all the other code. So my it may well be the case that actually achieving again it's not worth that because we can just rely on the existing approach until he gets like something. But through those stakes are like client functionality order. I, don't know well,.

F

L

The other alternative would be not to go with a contract based approach and simply.

I

L

Not an opcode but like I guess a non-color to.

F

L

Just needed: well it basically it take the code that was written there in serpent and just implemented in whatever is the code of your whatever the languages that the client was written in? No, no just.

F

L

M

F

D

L

F

L

Do them much to whatever.

F

No, that's that's.

L

Dangerous because it makes like it could make life a lot harder for like clients, and it basically means that, like the entire historical set of block chains become stuck technically part of the state and like it, it nullifies the benefits of kind of automatically having box. Yet like get hash links. The blocks that are much older than they are like yeah, like I, see the primary benefit of this yep year. Kind of precisely being that you have a storage tree that contains like some subset of previous block hashes.

M

I yeah I really.

I

Wanted to have to finalize in turn.

M

Okay in longus and the.

I

Spec is considered I.

M

I

M

G

M

G

Way mostly myself finishing this one.

M

A

Good I would say that I I think I agree with you that 1:45 1052 and 1014 should be priority because they're the seem to be the easiest to implement and what we can do is we can start making tests and start implementing those three and then, throughout the next chord F meeting. We can decide on the other two and talk more about them. I think that would be valuable and also.

I

A

Would help us to move forward because right now, we've kind of been at a standstill for months about what to do with Constantinople. So I'd like to move something forward. A great person, library and.

G

There's the option of doing content and Opel soon with these and not changing the the Ice Age and then doing another court earlier year. Changing.

G

A

That would apply some pressure. Definitely.

G

M

G

Think we need a bit.

O

More precision in this so first first: firstly, the test the state test for ships already and you.

M

Can already start testing.

I

M

I

Have to enabled Constantinople Hartford in facing.

G

M

G

M

I

Thing is I, think.

M

I

Explained it's it's much easier to decide on the order, so.

M

We can add another VIP.

I

M

I

Constantinople, how.

M

Configuration tests and so.

I

We just need to pick one of the two laughs.

M

I

Easier to coordinate this way, instead of trying to.

M

A

M

A

You saying create the test it early or make an EIP that defines which ones are going to.

M

Specify which, which which PAP will go next in terms of.

A

M

A

I

M

I

M

I

Without decide which one goes, I.

M

I

Like cuz we've had this create to implementation in some places and.

O

Maybe we've had some tests for that too.

M

So I would keep that.

F

D

I

K

Already there maybe that's like not a full set of test, some.

M

K

Them out there I.

B

Would pick the create two.

M

And yeah I think we can focus in a cpp atrium to the final.

I

Of the implementation of vectors and.

M

A

Test next week, great.

D

N

I think I agree.

B

With that suggestion, and basically we have the three easy peons.

D

Those should be in command.

G

I

D

Start write a test.

I

For it and then.

D

I

One people in command is free and write the tests and see by the report we can actually to make to maybe write.

D

I

To debate it for.

D

I

Week next predominately in week, to see see.

D

I

Played approximately to do that and then.

D

I

On that, we could have a good starting point. What.

D

I

We want to test that.

A

Sounds good to me: anybody have any other comments on this cool. This sounds good. We have shifted towards or not shifted towards, we're coming together to say that 145, 1052 and 1014 are low enough hanging fruit and that had already either been started.

L

A

L

And people want a version of 210 that's much simpler and doesn't include like EDM dependencies. I just did an extremely quick write-up. If you look at number 1218, it's yeah, it's like a look at least half of what I think we want, but it's much simpler.

A

Here, I'll post it into the little channel.

G

A

G

Into mobile, without how.

B

L

Can it be turned into what can.

G

It be turned into the.

L

Bowl lieutenant over time.

B

G

L

Like the fundamental form is kind of the same, so it does have a panel some other things in a way, that's somewhat different.

A

Okay, so we can look at that and discuss it for next meeting. I'd, say sound, good sure, cool, okay, so I think we have some good conclusions from this meeting. Do other people have comments on this and that we don't have a timeline exactly, but what we do have is we're starting stuff and, depending on how fast we get stuff done in the next two weeks, we can actually start to set some dates and finalize some things.

D

G

Declaration are we a team or.

N

Four mm: oh.

D

N

A

We should aim before DEFCON, but that's not final yet because I haven't I I feel like we have not reached consensus on that. I.

L

A

If we, if we do reach consensus like if people say we want this done before DEFCON I, think we have to only do these three IPs I, don't think we can do more than that mm-hmm.

A

But that's just my point: what is October.

K

A

Like October 30th to November for third or something come.

D

On we can do.

A

It easy for Yankee something I like your enthusiasm and I'll. If you're being serious, then yeah, we can do four.

A

Okay, so let's see if Nick can implement his S store stuff and we can get an idea of any pitfalls that we'd run into Peter. Do you talk to? Can you talk to Nick and ask him to do that? If not I can mess yeah.

D

A

Cool, thank you explain what we talked about in the core. Dev call all right. Anyone have anything else, otherwise, I think I'm. We're about to wrap up.

A

All right cool talk to everybody in two weeks lane or myself will have notes up and I can put in the core dev Channel. What the next two dues are bye. Everybody.