►
Description
This week the Antelope Coalition discusses the progress made with Ledger support talks, P2P RFP, IBC governance, Final Finality / IBC milestone payments, Wallet SDK milestones and more!
00:00:00 Start
00:00:31 Ledger app support
00:03:15 New P2P RFP
00:05:53 IBC governance
00:09:52 Reprioritization of the top agenda items
00:15:57 Secure smart contract library
00:24:05 Developer onboarding and development workshops
00:28:00 Final Finality and IBC
00:41:00 Wallet SDK
00:42:30 Milestone payments for SDKs
00:45:53 Vote for FF / IBC payment
00:54:14 End
The EOS Network Foundation coordinates financial and non-financial support to encourage the growth and development of the EOS Network. We’re harnessing the power of decentralization to chart a coordinated future for the EOS Network as a force for positive global change.
// EOS Network Foundation //
https://www.eosnetwork.com
https://twitter.com/EosNFoundation
https://www.linkedin.com/company/eos-network-foundation
https://t.me/EOSNetworkFoundation
https://discord.gg/eos-network
info@eosnetwork.com
#EOS #EOSIO #ENF
A
All
right
we're
kicking
this
off
I'm
going
down
the
in
progress
items.
The
first
one
is
opening
this
board
to
public.
It's
been
decided
that
we're
gonna
make
this
publicly
available
so
that
anybody
watching
this
video,
you
can
see
the
URL
up
at
the
top
or
you
can
navigate
through
GitHub
to
find
us,
but
you
will
be
able
to
see
the
information
on
here
right.
That's
a
good
enough!
Summary.
Second
item
Ledger
app,
not
supported.
A
B
C
B
But
we
can
do
that.
Why
don't
we?
You
know
you
and
I
can
take
that
offline
Jeff
since
they're
in
our
organization,
the
the
status
says
they've
now
begun
to
meet
and
they've
begun
to
start
to
work
on
how
they
will
do
the
support
for
the
application,
so
Eric
and
Bart
are
discussing
how
that
support
would
work.
B
That's
the
current
status
and
they've
been
me.
They
either
have
met
or
will
meet
with
that
person.
I
think
he's
in
Paris
the
person
they're
meeting
with
is
embarrassed
and
they're
going
to
work
through
that
and
then
figure
out
how
that's
going
to
work.
That's
I
know
that
is
at
least
the
current
status.
They
may
have
gone
further
than
that,
but
maybe
you
and
I
need
to
check
on
that.
Each
week
with
Eric
or
Bart
I
I
had
intended
to
invite
BART
to
this
meeting.
Somehow
the
invitation
fell
off
the
meeting.
B
E
D
G
H
F
B
B
Through
Francis,
okay,
because
yes,
we
know
that
both
oci
and
that
group
want
to
vote
so
then
Jeff
can
get
that
to
them
early.
We
can
publish
it
whenever
Zach
has
his
normal
publishing
schedule,
but
at
least
to
the
two
that
we
know
have
said
they
are
absolutely
going
to
reply.
We
can
get
them
on
it
sooner
rather
than
later.
B
A
G
So
we
had
a
call
on
Monday
to
discuss
these
questions.
I
think
we,
we
all
agreed
that
the
proposal
for
the
domain
structure
was
sensible,
makes
sense.
We
did
ask
I
did
send
the
the
proposal
and
a
few
a
few
ideas
there
to
Bart
so
that
he
can
review
it.
Withinf
engineering
just
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
going
to
run
into
any
issues.
There
were
a
few
like
small
edge
cases,
but
it
shouldn't
affect.
G
We
probably
should
have
one
last
call
just
to
really
formalize
the
process
that
we
outlined
like
previously,
which
is
basically
each
chain
handles
their
own
governance
internally,
and
we
probably
just
need
to
have
some
sort
of
point
of
contact.
Make
sure
that
if
there's
any
issue,
we
can
get
a
hold
of
each
other
quickly,
so
that
any
intervention
can
occur
in
family
manner,
but
I
think
that's
pretty
much
it
from
the
from
the
from
that
standpoint.
A
So
for
the
follow-up
meeting,
would
you
like
to
propose?
This
is
a
topic
for
Monday's
standing
meeting?
Yes,
if
possible,
that'd
be
great.
Okay,
the
only
other
topic
I
believe
that's
competing
with
this.
Is
the
new
chain
Joiner
as
everybody
else
comfortable
with
bumping
that
and
closing
this
topic
down.
First.
E
G
E
Possibly
my
my
take
is
I
think
we
still
while
we've
got
a
lot
of
agreement,
I
think
we
I
would
still
like
to
see
us
have
a
documented
process.
I
mean
we
don't
have
to
go
into
it.
Not
ours,
but
I
want
to
know
what
steps
one
through
five
are.
If
there's
a
problem,
even
you
know
with
step
one
being
recognizing
there's
a
problem,
but
still
it's
going
to
take
some
time
to
to
put
that
together.
I
think
that's
my
guess.
E
A
A
A
All
right,
reprioritization,
so
I
left
this
on
just
give
a
status
of
we
talked
about
the
P2P
a
second
ago.
That's
out
the
other.
Three
are
still
under
requirements:
development.
There
is
a
point
of
clarification
that
I
wanted
to
make
sure
I
understood
on
the
ram
limitations
there
are
existing
proposed
Solutions
out.
There
was
the
request
to
essentially
consolidate
that
and
then
write
the
RFP
based
on
the
existing
known
Solutions,
or
was
the
RFP
to
essentially
generate
a
new
like
blue
paper
type
thing.
D
The
solutions
being
proposed
are
workarounds
more
than
like
a
comprehensive
end-to-end
solution
to
to
the
to
the
ram
utilization
model
by
the
antelope,
stack
and
I.
Think
I
think
this
particular
RFP
was
was
to
do
the
research
and
come
up
with
definite
proposal
proposed
solutions
to
address
these
things.
D
Okay,
yes,
and
and
then
there
are
just
different
buckets
the
way.
I
understand
it,
because
you
know
how
accounts
are
handled,
impacts
run
versus
how
Ram
is
used
by
a
block
producer,
for
example,
during
the
blog
validation
process
right.
So
so
they're.
Just
all
these
different
things
that
relate
to
how
Ram
is
used
and
I
think
each
of
them
needs
to
be
looked
at
from
a
perspective
of
ram
as
a
lens.
But
there
may
be
different
solutions
addressing
Ram
constraint,
but
they
would
be
targeting
different
systems.
A
A
A
F
The
meeting
did
happen.
Eric
Passmore
took
that
meeting
I
was
not
able
to
attend
it,
so
I
don't
have
a
a
play-by-play
for
what
happened
during
that
meeting
and
I
haven't
had
a
chance
yet
to
sync
up
with
Eric,
but
it
did
happen.
It
happened
yesterday.
We
should
be
able
to
have
some
information
about
that
quite
soon.
D
A
D
E
E
Okay,
so
since
there
are
such
a
few
small
number
of
people
reviewing
it
I,
you
know
wanted
to
give
it
an
especially
thorough,
look
and
I
did
there
are
I.
Have
some
concerns?
I
think
that
we
should
talk
to
this
group
and
get
an
understanding
about
why
certain
certain
phases
have
the
hours
that
they
do.
E
I
guess
is
the
easiest
way
to
put
that
there
are
some
things
that
I
I
just
like
to
unders
I,
just
to
hear
a
little
bit
of
justification
for
for
the
amount
of
hours
set
out
for
things
like
does
setting
up
the
protocol
and
creating
the
initial
smart
contracts
when
all
of
these
all
of
these
are
things
that
there
are
really
good
precedents
for
in
in
solidity
that
have
been.
You
know,
battle
tested
for
for
quite
a
while
and
I.
Think
there's
a
lot
that
we
can.
E
We
can
do
to
have
I
mean
I,
think
the
the
structure
that
evolved
there
is
very
likely
that
the
structure
we
would
evolve
so
I
wanted
to
talk.
I
wanted
to
talk
about
to
the
groups
about
why
those
costs
were
high,
because
those
are
also
the
highest
costs.
So
my
take
is
I
mean
I
wish
we
could
just
vote
on
this
I
know
we're
behind,
but
I
would
like
to
to
have
a
meeting
with
them.
Yeah.
B
That's
that's
probably
the
best
thing
to
do.
I
did
have
a
meeting
with
them,
because
we
just
generally
have
been
holding
meetings
at
9am
on
Mondays,
which
would
be
6
a.m.
Your
time
and
not
realistic
yeah,
so
I
was
able
to
do
that,
but
I
think
and
honestly
I
think
it'd
be
good.
Now
that
Bart
is
here
for
BART
to
take
my
spot
and
be
the
review
from
enf
so
that
you
know
again
it's
it's
got
a
another
set
of
eyes
on
it.
B
You
know
to
me
they
the
way
they
rationalized
it
I
understood
it.
I
felt
I
could
maybe
press
on
some
of
their
rates,
but
the
hours
you
know,
I,
I,
didn't
feel
qualified
to
say,
I.
Think
you
can
do
that
in
two-thirds
of
those
hours
and
be
able
to
give
a
reason
why
you
feel
you
can
do
that
Douglas
by
talking
about
how
some
of
the
things
have
been
done
in
ethereum
I.
Think
Bart
would
be
better
positioned
to
do
that.
E
B
E
Yeah
I
I
mean
Ted
you're.
Great
Bart
is
also
great
and
I
think
in
this
specific
issue.
If
he's
willing
to
take
it
on
that,
he
would
be
even
more
authoritative
in
in
either
either
confirming
or
my
my
concerns
or
or
you
know,
covering
them.
So
that
would
be
great
I,
gotta,
say
I,
I'm,
sorry
to
get
to
this
point
and
have
and
then
just
say,
hey,
let's
have
another
meeting
I
know
we
wanted
to
move
forward.
E
A
B
B
E
B
So
there
is
a
call.
Unfortunately,
I
have
some
bad
news
here.
There
is
a
call
next
Monday,
the
7th,
but
Bart
and
I
are
in
a
conflicting
call
with
Eve
during
the
entire
duration
of
that
call.
So
it
can't
be
next
Monday
if
Bart
were
to
join
so
again,
you
could
have
Douglas
on
that
call
with
you
Jeff
at
nine
on
Monday,
but
Bart
would
not
be
available
and
I'm
not
available.
The.
A
B
You
know
so
9
A.M
Eastern,
so
Douglas
would
you
be
available
at
6
a.m,
on
a
Tuesday,
or
would
you
be
able
to
make
your
calendar
available
at
nine
with
all
of
the
you
know,
D5
box,
Pizza,
Guys
and
EOS
Nation
folks
be
willing
to
slide
that
meeting
for
one
week
from
Monday
to
Tuesday
same
time.
Slot.
Then
you
could,
if
Bart's
available.
If
you
can
open
his
calendar,
that
would
work
because
I
don't
think
Eve
is
willing
to
let
Bart
out
of
the
meeting
on
I.
E
E
So
I
don't
know
the
I,
don't
know
the
in
the
I.
Don't
know
about
the
meeting
that
the
that
Eve,
Jeff
and
or
Eve
Eve,
Ted
and
sorry
Mark
will
be
on
I
wanted
to
call
him
Wyatt.
So
anyway
the
BART
will
be
on,
but
is
there
any
chance
that
could
that
one
could
be
moved
so
that
that
we
could
all
just
use.
H
A
G
So
from
our
standpoint,
the
the
need
for
this
is
pretty
much
gone
now.
I'm,
just
like
the
it
would
have
been
useful,
like
you
know,
maybe
like
two
three
months
ago,
but
at
this
point
we
kind
of
just
like,
went
and
started
working
on
on
the
code
base
directly
and
at
this
point
at
this
point,
at
least
in
our.
G
In
our
scenario,
it
doesn't
mean
it
wouldn't,
wouldn't
give
us
that
big,
a
bank
of
for
our
buck,
so
we're
still
happy
to
help
push
forward.
If
there's,
if
there's
a
an
interest
by
other
parties,
but
I,
don't
think
it's
going
to
bring
us
enough
benefit
to
to
justify
keeping
working
on
that.
If,
if
nobody
else
is
interested
so
which
is
kind
of
good
news
in
in
a
way
because,
basically
like
we
don't
zoom
in
the.
B
Lead
part
is
so
Bart
and
I
have
a
call
with
oci
at
4
30.
Today
it
has
been
oci
that
has
been
slow
and
I'm
a
little
surprised
that
the
call
is
now
with
their
delivery
manager
and
their
head
of
sales.
That's
either
means
they've
figured
out
a
pricing
model
or
the
two
VPS
of
engineering
that
used
to
be
leading
the
charge,
have
lost
interest
and
I
guess
I'll
know
at
4
30..
B
You
know.
Obviously
we
still
have
a
number
of
new
developers
that
were
not
well
versed
in
eosio,
so
we
still
have
an
internal
need
to
kind
of
bring
people
through
a
training
program,
and
if
that
exists,
it
would
then
be
you
know,
and
we
can
get
it
agreed
upon.
They've
always
been
willing
to
allow
the
chain
to
also
put
people
through
it.
B
You
know
by
next
week,
if,
if
it's
the
good
news,
meaning
that
they're
going
to
tell
me
their
pricing
model,
Etc
I
will
be
able
to
share
that
on
this
call.
If,
unfortunately,
it's
like
hey,
we've
realized
this
isn't
what
we
really
do
for
a
living
or
something
like
that.
I'll
share
that
as
well
Guillaume.
You
had
been
meeting
with
oci
kind
of
asynchronous
to
this
right.
Have
they
given
you
any
kind
of
indication
on
where
they
were
heading
no.
G
Not
really
in
basically
the
discussion
kind
of
took
another
another
direction
as
well,
pretty
much
for
the
same
reasons
that
you
you
outlined
like
it
was
kind
of
slow
and
we're
still.
They
were
still
waiting
on
more
decisions
on
their
end,
so
so
we
kind
of
took
another
Direction
where
we
might
collaborate
with
them
on
various
projects.
But
for
this
particular
part
we
didn't.
We
didn't
really
appreciate
that
that
discussion.
G
So
the
one
thing,
however,
is
that
the
the
the
the
enf
engineers,
namely
Eric
and
Matt,
did
at
some
point
like
a
few
weeks
ago,
expressed
the
the
will
to
kind
of
do
a
one-time
off
I.
Guess
like
call
it
a
webinar
or
maybe
a
zoom
call
or
something
where
they
would
be
essentially
giving
some
over
vertical
structure
of
the
processes
and
whatnot
that
we
would
record
and
that
we
would
make
available
to
to
to
developers
willing
to
to
go
through
the
process.
G
G
Absolutely
so
happy
to
report
that,
as
of
yesterday,
the
NF
has
completed
their
internal
review
of
the
IBC
contracts,
and
essentially
everything
is
good
to
go.
We
have
the
auditor
team
lined
up
starting
next
week,
so
on
Monday
I
have
a
call
with
them
to
get
the
process
started.
So
so
everything
is
moving
along
very
nicely.
There
we
contacted
a
number
of
teams
to
also
help
review
and
deploy
the
IBC
proof
server
that
we've
built.
G
So
that's
our
Milestone
that
is
set
for
November
November
25th,
if
I'm,
if
I'm
correct
so
for
that
one
we
we
only
so
far
had
yes,
Nation
basically
spend
time
on
this
we've
got.
We
got
like
you
know,
like
a
few
of
the
teams,
said
that
they
were
definitely
interested,
but
they
haven't,
they
haven't
spent
the
time
just
yet.
So
we
will
we'll
make
sure
that
we
gently
poke
them
and
see
See.
G
If
we
can
move
that
forward,
there
was
a
as,
as
you
and
I
discussed,
this
Steve
you
suggested.
We
get
in
touch
with
some
of
the
Chinese
teams,
and
I
was
just
I
was
just
curious.
Like
was
that
for
review
purposes,
or
was
that
more
for
essentially
the
central
decentralizing,
the
infrastructure
in
preparation
for
the
launch?
Because
we.
H
To
get
look
at
different
teams
and
I
I
guess:
I
would
open
that
to
Telos
wax
BPS
as
well.
I
guess
ux
as
well,
but
basically
it's
it's
always
the
same
actors
that
kind
of
review
which
is
fine,
but
then
it
would
also
be
great
to
have
different
people
because
they
might
have
different
skill
sets.
They
might
be
breaking
different
things
or
they
might
have
different
Hardware
they
might
whatever
it
is.
H
I
think
it
would
be.
It
would
be
great
to
have
more
people
there
and
also,
ultimately,
especially
for
this
BPS
will
need
to
deploy
and
or
make
changes.
I
guess
approve
the
the
changes
right
on
on
respecting
the
chain
so
to
have
more
of
the
BPS
in
general.
That
are
aware
of
what
this
is
and
how
this
is
going
to
work
is
going
to
ultimately
facilitate,
if
there's
a
consensus
upgrade
and
or
if
there's
any
kind
of
contracts
to
update
that
type
of
thing.
H
That
makes
perfect
sense
and
because
a
lot
of
our
BPS
overlap
anyways
between
the
four
chains,
I
I,
would
you
know
outside
of
the
list
that
I
give
you
I
would
also
go
to
others.
As
well,
but
the
the
Chinese
ones
in
particular
was
also
so
that
especially
the
technically
proficient
ones.
If
then,
there
are
questions
afterwards,
it's
much
easier
to
communicate
with,
with
those
in
your
time
zone
and
language
right,
basically,
space
and
so
I
just
figured
just
kind
of
more
decentralized
in
that
way,
as
well.
G
F
E
G
G
I
would
like
to
maybe
schedule
a
call,
an
open
call
up
to
a
certain
degree,
with
some
prominent
developers
in
the
community
or
those
that
actually
expressed
interest
in
building
on
top
of
the
IBC
solution
and
have
a
kind
of
like
deep
dive
and
kind
of
like
a
open
discussion
about
the
protocol
about
the
proof
format
about
various
Concepts,
like
that,
they
can
also
be
recorded
and
made
available
to
to
others.
So
I
think
it's
a
fairly.
F
G
G
There's
the
light
proof
DB
that
we
built
there's
a
UI
that
uses
all
of
that,
and
so
that's
that's
a
lot
of
moving
parts
that
have
been
that
we've
been
working
on
for
quite
a
while
now
so
I
think
I
think
having
some
sort
of
a
video
recording
of
that
initial
discussion,
where
people
are
asking
questions
that
can
eventually
serve
as
a
basis
for
an
FAQ
and
help.
You
know
like
identify
points
where
we
need
might
need
more
explanations
and
more
hand-holding
for
developers.
G
I
think
it
would
be
quite
useful
and
would
also
get
like
the
kind
of
eyes
that
we
want
on
that
code,
so
obviously
like
the
enf
now
will
have
like
has
reviewed
it.
We're
going
to
have
the
external
auditor
team
to
review
it
as
well.
But
as
you
as
you
all
know,
these
are
typically
very
targeted
pieces
of
of
a
blockchain
infrastructure.
D
D
This
please
go
ahead.
I
was
going
to
ask
if
there's
a
a
repo
and
some
sort
of
a
architecture.
Are
there
any
server
like
architecture,
diagram,
artifacts
and
the
repositories
that
that
we
could
have?
Let's
say
you
know,
like
Wax,
blockchain
team,
take
a
look
at
and
and
and
review
this
stuff.
Yes,
so.
G
So
all
the
code
will
be
available.
We
already
have
some
documentation,
that's
already
written,
that
can
help
understanding
the
whole
process
and
I
think
I.
Think
yeah,
like
anyone.
Anyone
who's
willing
to
put
in
the
effort
right
now
can
can
get
to
the
bottom
of
it
and
I.
Think
with
this
a
recorded
call,
I
think
it
will
be
a
quite
gentle
introduction,
we'll
give
we'll
give
people
a
good
starting
point
to
it's
great
understand.
What's
going
on.
G
G
There
definitely
would
be
a
section
like
a
portion
of
that
call.
That
would
be
something
like
an
AMA,
but
there
would
probably
be
a
presentation
as
well
to
to
get
started,
let's
kind
of
explain
the
general
overview
and
General
Concepts
that
we're
using
and
then
the
second
part
of
that
call
could
definitely
be
an
AMA
I
think
it
would
make
perfect
sense.
E
G
If
you're
bringing
this
point
like,
we
would
probably
I
mean
like
I'm,
it
would
definitely
be
made
public,
but
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
also
have
a
certain
kind
of
like
threshold
for
people
joining
just
so
that
we
don't
have
people
coming
up
with
the
you
know
like
right,
101
questions
yeah.
Second,.
E
That's
that's
what
I
was
leading
to
I
think
we
may
want
to,
depending
on
what
kind
of
what
kind
of
initial
sign
up
we
get
we
may
want
to.
You
know,
try
to
to
invite
or
entice
certain
certain
people
to
be
there,
just
because
it's
going
to
be
much
more
useful
with
those
people
and
it
doesn't
have
to
be
a
lot
of
people
as
long
as
they're
they're,
good
quality
people
who
ask
probing
questions
so
I
mean
by
good
quality.
I
mean
I,
mean
people
who
are
reversed
in
these
issues.
Let.
A
Me
throw
this
out
in
the
interest
of
time
because
we're
starting
to
get
into
some
weeds
a
game
I
actually
contacted
Adam
offline
and
he'll
reach
out
to
you
about
getting
a
list
of
potential
invitees
to
set
up
for
that
meeting,
and
then
you
can
really
get
into
the
deep
dive
on
this.
Does
that
sound
like
the
the
right
plan.
G
D
E
One
other
thing
on
the
previous
point
about
the
difficulty
in
fine
in
in
finding
expert
level
reviewers
I,
think
for
for
the
cryptography
or
any
time
it
comes
up
in
the
in
the
in
the
future.
I
think
we
may
find.
If
we
don't
have
enough
people
internally,
we
may
find
we
have
to
it
makes
sense
to
go
out.
You
know
to
hire
somebody
outside
to
to
review
these.
Some
of
these
things
are
going
to
be
hard
and
I.
E
Think
we
it's
it's
in,
although
it's
an
additional
cost,
it's
it
would
be
important
to
have
somebody
who
really
truly
deeply
understands
all
these
issues
to
make
sure
that
they're
that
they're
all
getting
checked
off
properly
like.
If
you
handed
me
an
audit
and
and
said
you
know
this,
and
that
needs
to
be
checked,
I,
don't
know
where
I
was
where
I
would
start
like.
Is
it
is
it
it
I,
don't
know
and
I
think
a
lot
of
people
fall
into
that,
and
so
just
something
we
should
be.
E
G
A
G
C
Yeah
sure
try
to
keep
it
quick.
We
had
another
meeting
yesterday.
It
was
our
second
meeting.
This
one
was
recorded
So.
If
you
want
to
see
the
contents
of
that
meeting,
there's
a
recording
as
well
as
a
transcript
that
you
can
kind
of
scan
through.
If
you
want
development
has
started
on
kind
of
the
core
components.
In
that
meeting,
we
did
go
over
the
kind
of
reorganization
of
Milestones
in
which
these
core
components
are
kind
of
the
next
step.
A
A
H
Yes,
so
the
first
payment
for
the
sdks
was
sent
out.
Thank
you
very
much
for
for
processing
that
the
other
day
guys
we
had.
If
you,
if
you
guys
recall,
we
created
a
new
account
which
I
posted
in
the
group
a
while
back
the
web
client
SDK
account.
We
had
put
the
permissions,
as
we
had
talked
about
the
permission
sets
so
that
essentially
active
would
be
the
enf
thing
as
the
enf.
H
What
we
didn't
do
so
the
account
was
set
up.
All
of
you
signed
on
that
to
create
it.
The
permissions
are
created
Etc.
What
we
didn't
do
was
twofold:
one
was
to
send
a
test
transaction
to
make
sure
it
works
and,
and
then
once
that
transaction
was
set,
and
we
confirmed
that
the
account
is
is
functional
and
such,
which
should
be
fine
that
then
we
transfer
over
the
I
guess
entirety
of
what
is
earmarked
for
the
SDK.
So
it's
1.3
million
minus
I.
H
H
In
order
to
to
move
this
along,
I
can
take
that
on
send
a
test.
Transaction
I
believe
I'll
need
your
signatures
and
we
can
send
from
yase
it'll
cost
like
20
bucks
or
whatever
the
20
usdt,
or
something
like
that,
we'll
send
it
over
once
that's
good,
then
we
would
do
the
request
for
the
full
amount
for
the
sdks
minus
the
the
first
payment
that
we
just
put
and
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
back
up,
because
we
kind
of
forgot
about
that.
For
the
last
couple
of
weeks.
E
H
I
could
probably
yeah
I
could
probably
do
it
later
today,
so
it
should
be
relatively
simple:
it'll
be
a
a
similar
transaction
to
what
we
did
the
other
day,
where
four
of
us
or
three
out
of
four
need
to
sign.
I'll
I'll,
make
it
like
twenty
dollars
or
whatever
it'll
be
you'll,
see
also
there's
no
fees
anyways,
it
doesn't
really
matter
and
then
we'll
we'll
see
that
we
have
control
over
the
other
newly
created
account.
H
No
worries,
I,
just
thought:
I
would
Aaron
and
I
actually
forgot
about
it.
Aaron
and
I
had
a
call
earlier
and
I
was
asking
about
the
accountant
and
then
that's
when
I
realized
wait
a
minute.
We
didn't
use
the
account
that
we
created
specifically
for
this,
so
no
worries
I
yeah.
Thank
you,
so
I'll
try
to
get
on
that
today.
That
way
it's
done
and
that
way
we
can
transfer
over
the
the
funds
this
week
and
we
can
start
using
that
specific
account
for
this
specific
RFP
foreign.
H
H
So
the
initial
this
this
will
be
the
first
Milestone
that
has
been
achieved
in
in
the
entirety
of
that
RFP,
which
was
comprises
the
instant
finality
in
IBC.
It's
the
first
Milestone
achieved
all,
although
that's
the
second
payment.
So
the
first
payment
was
that
initial
payment
of,
if
I'm,
not
mistaken,
200
000
dollars
but
locked
in
EOS
I,
don't
recall
the
the
amount,
and
so
we
didn't
really
need
anybody
else's
review
for
that
first
transfer,
because
essentially
you
all
signed
the
contract.
Every
other
thing
is
it's
good.
H
The
other
chains
agreed
that
that
Milestone
has
been
completed
so
I,
don't
know
Jeff
if
you're
able
to
to
open
that
or
if
we
have
access
to
that.
If
not
that's
okay,
because
we
would
be
the
releasing
the
payment
as
EOS,
because
if
you
recall
the
the
first
you
know
nine
months
or
so
it's
all
on
EOS,
but
the
contract
itself
is
actually
between
each
of
us
and
ux.
And
so
we
still
want
your
approval
on
your
side
for
us
to
release
the
payments.
H
H
G
H
G
G
Fact
is
that
we
I
mean
that
Milestone
was
normally
supposed
to
be
done
for
a
while
yeah
it
was
It
was
supposed
to
be
the
first
and
then,
following
that
review
we
would
have
deployed
to
Jungle
and
kailan,
but
we
ended
up
finishing
this.
Essentially,
as
I
was
explaining
to
Eva,
maybe
that
last
week
I
was
saying
when
it
became
clear
that
we
we
would
reach
an
agreement
on
on
this.
A
G
Yeah
enf
engineering
was
was,
of
course,
very
busy
with
all
the
other
stuff,
so
it's
only
yesterday
that
they've
been
able
to
complete
that
review,
and
there
were
like
two
things
that
were
brought
up.
That
required
just
like
one
was
a
small
optimization
and
one
was
essentially
just
a
type
like
at
some
point.
Like
a
in
the
code,
there
was
a
a
integer
that
should
have
been
an
unsigned
teacher
that
was
very,
very
minor.
G
For
the
rest,
everything
was
fine,
so
that's
that
was
a
milestone
that
needed
to
be
reviewed
first
and
as
people
have
been
able
to
test
now
for
almost
two
months.
The
solution,
the
complete
solution,
has
been
deployed
to
test
Nets
and
is
working
like
not
only
on
Jungle
and
Thailand,
but
on
also
wax
test
net
Telos
testnet
and
ux
test
Nets.
So
as
far
as
far
as
we're
concerned,
that's
that's
basically
like
everything
that
was
required
and,
more
so
yeah.
D
H
And
so
we'll
coordinate
that
payment
and
for
for
references,
a
few
Milestones
that'll
be
coming
out
very
quickly,
one
by
one.
So
in
terms
of
I,
don't
recall
which
numbers
but
I
think
it's
it's
like
Milestone,
two,
five
and
six
are
going
to
be
released
or
brought
up
for
a
vote
and
I
think
we
just
did
number
two.
H
Let's
say
in
the
next
couple
of
weeks
and
that's
how
he's
roughly
500
000,
Yachts
I,
think
it's
497,
000
and
change
so
ux
is,
is
going
to
be
getting
I.
Think
it's
in
total
five
Milestones
that
will
be
complete
after
those
are
done
or
four
or
five
out
of
the
I
think
nine
original
ones
or
six
original
ones
for
IBC
yeah.
The
final
one
I
think
is
the
big
one,
which
is
the
actual
deployment
on
maintenance.
G
We
do
have
I
mean
again
that
was
that
was
a
bit
that
was
supposed
to
be
a
bit
earlier,
this
one.
So
originally
we
were
planning
to
be
the
only
providers
of
infrastructure
for
the
proof
servers,
but
we
might
actually
have
a
few
more
that
will
be
ready
as
well.
So
there's
there's
another
I
guess
discussion
item
that
we
may
want
to
have
at
some
point
is:
how
do
we
facilitate
the
discovery
of
these
endpoints?
G
So
I
don't
know
like
I,
don't
know
like
if
the
bp.json
format
is
still
being
used
by
BPS
on
yes
and
on
other
networks.
It
might
be
interesting
to
add,
like
an
item
in
there
to
for
for
BPS
that
are
operating.
One
of
these
proof
servers.
There
might
be
other
mechanisms
to
coordinate
like
that
on
other
chains,
but
essentially
it's
just
gonna.
Have
you
can
consider
this
as
an
a
new
type
of
API
endpoint
that
operators
can
make
available
for
for
for
these
type
of
proofs?