►
From YouTube: NEAR EVM Working Group Update [2020-10-23]
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
Okay,
so
from
yesterday,
from
from
the
last
week
meeting,
I
was
I
wanted
to
to
make
like
a
track
for
for
different
action
items
that
we
generated
during
this
call.
So
I
put
it
in
the
action
point
loan
list
here.
It
is
here-
and
I
was
looking
at
this
during
all
the
week
and
I
was
like
marking
that
some
things
were
done,
so
I
just
wanted
to
do
a
quick
review.
C
So
so
we
have
shared
the
roadmap
for
the
evm
development,
and
lots
of
people
were
commenting
this,
and
thanks
from
for
from
personally
from
myself
to
to
all
of
you
on
this
thanks,
for
we
also
done
some
some
other
stuff.
C
So
there
are
lots
of
things
that
were
accomplished
already
and
I'm
going.
I
would
like
to
to
put
additional
item
action
items
here,
so
we
will
have
all
the
loan
lists
and
we
will
have
some
kind
of
like
statuses
of
what
we
have
done
during
this
call
yeah
and
now,
let's,
let's
start
with
the
with
the
with
the
reviews
of
who's,
doing
what?
What
are
the
blockers?
D
Sure
sounds
good.
I
have
a
couple
notes
here.
So
there's
three
things
I'll
talk
about
so
the
relayer
side,
the
pet
shop,
which
is
the
sort
of
simplest
example
that
will
help
people
kind
of
understand,
like
partners
who
want
to
play
with
this
and
then
on
the
near
core
side,
I'll
start
with
the
relayer
side.
D
So
there
is
a
pr
pushed
for
the
relayer.
It's
a
bit
of
a
work
in
progress
right
now,
but
it
is
like
basically
demonstrating
that
once
you
talk
to
the
relayer
sending
a
signed
message
from
metamask,
it
can
check
the
validity
and
return
the
correct
address.
D
We
need
to
basically
take
that
message,
turn
it
into
bytes
and
then
finally
send
it
to
the
meta
call
function.
So
that's
kind
of
the
the
final
step
here,
but
before
we
do
that,
I
think
I'll
talk
about
actually
the
near
core
side.
So
the
final
push
here
is
getting
rust
to
recover.
That
address.
As
I
mentioned
last
week
there
I
saw
two
implementations
that
didn't
work
properly
for
this
and
we're
just
figuring
this
out
right
now.
D
I
know
ilya
is
working
on
this
as
well
and
he
may
have
made
some
changes
since
last
night
that
I'm
unaware
of
I'm
really
happy
to
also
dive
in
and
work
on
this.
This
is
probably
the
most
important
thing
to
get
done
and
we
can
like
yeah,
rapidly
get
through
this.
If
we
have
the
inputs
that
we
are
saying
like
we
gave
these
inputs
to
metamask
and
we
want
to
recover
it
inside
of
rust.
D
D
C
D
Right,
I
I
think
I
mean
I
think
I
think
that's
a
good
question.
I
don't
exactly
know
the
answer
to
that.
I
think
I
think
that
we're
very
close
to
getting
it
because
there
you
know
we
can
dissect
how
it's
working
in
relayer,
because
it
is
able
to
do
that
which
is
using
a
metamask
library
called
eth,
sig
util.
So
we
we
know
that
it
can
work
and
we
can
dissect
this.
I
think
it's
just
probably
running
into
a
little
bit
of
rust
problems.
Maybe
there's
some
mistakes
that
we're
not
like.
B
Okay,
can
I
ask
you
just
just
in
case:
do
you
know
that
ec
recover
expects
certain
pre-appended
string
in
front
of
the
messages.
D
Yes,
so
the
digest
is
different
for
for
eip712
messages
like
it
has
to
start
with
like
19,
because
that
doesn't
that
that
never
happens
inside
of
rlp,
and
I
was
looking
closely
this
morning
and
for
a
while.
You
know
this
week
at
how
eastside
util
is
doing
it
and
the
way
that
we
have
it.
Ilia
set
it
up
and
I'm
not
seeing
anything
wrong.
But
we
just
need
to
look
closer.
I
think,
but
but
I
mean
like.
B
B
D
Yeah,
I
think
I
know
what
you're
talking
about
and
yeah
that
that
is
included
in
this.
We're
not
we're
not
just
trying
to
easily
recover
the
the
plain
way
cool
got
it
yeah.
So
I
I
my
sense
is
that's
that's
really
close
and
that
I
think
I
mean
that
could
be
done
possibly
today.
I
I
mentioned
before.
I
think
it
would
be.
I
know
we
have
to
watch
out
for
the
scope
in
terms
of
meta
transactions.
D
I
am
just
sort
of
pushing
for
us
trying
to
get
this
by
wednesday
and
if
not,
then
we
can,
you
know,
do
scope
a
little
bit
anyway
on
the
pet
shop
side.
This
is
the
last
piece.
So
currently
I
have
like
a
hard-coded
key
that
works.
C
Mike
mike
one
question:
can
we
can
we,
since
this
is
the
issue
that
is
like
the
second
call
during
the
second
call,
is
appearing?
Maybe
we
can
do
some
kind
of
action
item
here
and
what
do
you
think
that
what
can
be
here
an
action
item
to
to
solve
this
issue?
Who
is
who
is
the
the
code
owner
of
the
ec
recovery?
Is
it
ilia.
D
I
would
say
it's
like
illya
and
myself.
I
think
he
has
been
fine
like
stealing
time
to
do
this,
but
I
don't
think
that
this
is
his
full-time
thing,
so
I
I
would
love
to
be
the
code
owner
on
this
and
just
get
the
latest
updates.
I
think
it'd
be
a
very
interesting
and
challenging
thing.
So
I
guess
you
could
consider
me
the
code
owner
and
I
can
make
sure
that
I'm
communicating
with
ilya.
C
D
B
D
Ilia
has
recently
done
like
demystifies
a
lot
of
that,
so
I
I
don't
think
so,
but
I
would
say
the
action
item
is
like
report
back
any
trouble,
if
I
can't
get
to
if
I
can't
get
this
recovered
by
like
wednesday,
hopefully
way
sooner
than
that.
C
Okay,
well
maybe
we
can
do
it.
So
if
we,
if
we,
if
you
are
saying
that
the
wednesday
is
like
a
decision
day
on
the
the
scope-
and
maybe
maybe
you
can-
you
can
report
this
on
on
the
morning
of
tuesday
and
and
we
will
have
like
additional
two
days,
so
somebody
can
take
a
look
into
into
this
stuff.
That's
what
I
think.
Okay.
D
Great
and
last
item-
I'm
sorry,
I'm
I'm
talking
so
much
or
did
someone
just
say
something.
A
D
B
D
Yeah,
okay,
I
think
there
will
be
some
logic
there
that
will
come
later.
For
instance,
I
think
we're
focusing
in
on
much
more
short-term
goals
in
terms
of
getting
this
on
beta
net
and
so
like
the
fee
in
tokens
that
you're
providing
the
relay
will
be
zero
for
a
while,
while
it's
on
beta
net
since
bayonet
is
not
you
know
real,
and
so
there
will
be
logic
like
you're
talking
about
where
a
relayer
will
decide.
If
this
is
enough
for
them
and
then
respond
back
whether
they
accept
it
or
not.
D
D
So
as
a
reminder
like
we
currently
only
have
this
evm
precompile
near
core
branch
running
on
a
single
gcp
node,
and
I
also
have
this
running
on
my
local
node.
D
D
If
they're
going
to
be
like
doing
the
adopt
a
pet
using
their
near
account,
the
gcp
node
doesn't
have
a
wallet,
so
that
would
that'll
be
a
little
bit
better
when
we
go
to
beta
net.
So
I
need
to
kind
of
rework
the
pet
shop
to
have
like
a
traditional.
Just
it
shouldn't
be
hard.
Traditional,
like
login,
store
this
information
inside
of
the
local.
What's
it
called
browser
local
storage
instead
of
the
in-memory
key
store.
I
think
another
kind
of
significant
task
that
I
need
to
do
for
this.
D
Beau
has
been
dming
me
and
doing
a
great
job
of
figuring
out
evm
stuff,
and
I
realized
that
the
readme
and
documentation
on
how
you
actually
do
all
this
is
kind
of
lacking
and
so
yeah.
I
would
would
like
to
definitely
flush
out
the
the
readme
on
the
pet
shop,
a
lot
more
so
that
partners
who
are
eager
to
start
working
on
this
can
really
figure
out
what's
going
on
here,
and
that
is
it
for
me.
I
think.
A
Yes,
so
from
my
side,
I
must
have
figured
out
what
features
we
need
to
ship
based
on
the
flaws
trying
to
start
conversation
still
didn't
hear
from
earlier
about
the.
A
Most
common
flaws,
the
biggest
problem
for
me,
is
figuring
out
why
people
would
use
evm,
so
let's
say,
there's
an
existing
contract
that
wants
to
move
to
near
from
ethereum
then
where
they
want
to
use
native
wallet
on
your
side
or
they
want
to
be
able
to
use
metamask.
B
C
Maybe
yeah-
maybe
maybe
we
can
maybe
we
can.
We
can
have
a
call
like
separate
from
this
one,
maybe
an
hour
call
and
maybe
like
just
like,
throw
some
ideas,
and
I
I
will
share
everything
that
I
know
from
from
what
our
partners
are
seeing
cool
and
not
saying
lots
and
lots
of
things,
but
something
already
yeah.
C
Okay:
okay,
boo:
how
is
it
going.
E
So,
in
summary,
I
finalized
the
pro
request
to
do
course,
content
and
deducting
cost
from
evm
transactions
in
detail.
Like
I
carefully
go
through
the
code
and
correct
a
few
cases
like
sending
money,
get
code
view
account
and
like
a
few
scenarios,
the
uem
is
not
a
bootstrap.
We
just
play
with
the
near
near
state
so
that
that
part,
of
course,
should
not
involve
a
uvm
related
cost
and
the
other
correction
is
for
evm
function.
Call
and
deploy
code.
E
Is
it's
a
two-step
operation
in
in
here
like
the
first
step,
is
to
send
the
sender
transaction
to
evm
account,
and
this
part
is
included,
create
a
action
receipt
and
is
counting
as
the
same
way
as
other
near
transactions
and
the
other
way.
The
the
second
step
is,
when
pro
being
sent
to
evm
account
the
is
actually
being
routed
to
run
evm
function,
and
this
part
is
the
uvm
only
cost.
E
So
the
first
step
is
being
correctly
measured
and
like
more
accurately
as
measured
and
deducted
in
our
existing
code
by
the
transaction,
cost
tx
cost
function,
and
the
second
part.
So
I
only
measure
the
second
part
by
only
measure
process.
Transaction
until
no
receipt
from
what
I
adding
a
lot
of
tricks
to
confirm
that
this,
the
first
part
is
already
been
deducted
and
the
second
part
only
happens
during
the
process
transaction
until
no
receipt
function
so
so
add
up.
E
The
total
cost
is
correct,
and
the
now
calls
only
counting
the
second
part,
and
it
also
becomes
less
for
even
less
volatile
than
last
week,
like
from
when
I
saw
the
20
becomes
like
less
than
10.
But
I
didn't
run
for
many
times,
because
now
it's
200k
accounts
takes
like
two
hours
to
run.
E
And
then
I'm
trying
to
add
in
the
balancer
test
to
the
balancer
contract
travel
test
with
near
uvm
near
web3
provider.
I
encounter
several
issues
and
it's
probably
resolved
by
what
mac
mike
has
suggested,
like
elia
has
a
forked
version
with
version
of
balance
of
contracts.
I
haven't
yet
tried
that,
but
hopefully
that
will
work
and,
if
so
I'll,
adding
that
to
our
nightly
suit.
C
E
So
the
wise
I
it's
called,
you
cannot
find
the
address.
Let
me
find
from
my
chat
to
mac.
E
D
Okay,
I
I
think
that
may
be
fixed
like
this
was
a
while
ago
and
sorry
I
don't
have
the
answer
right
now,
but
I
I
know
that
balancer
was
deployed
using
travel
and
migrate.
So
I
I
can't
remember
how
that
was,
but
I
believe
that
is
working
and
alex
to
answer
your
question
too.
I
think
someone
is
working
on
also
like
this
bounty
and
basically
it's
deployed
and
we
need
to
hook
up
a
front
end
and
have
it
interact
right,
so
the
so
it's
deployed
it's
there.
D
C
D
C
C
Okay,
great
any
additional
things
to
mention,
because
I
believe
we
are
running
a
little
bit
out
of
time,
no
yeah.
I
would.
B
Like
to
ask
eugene,
who
is
the
tl
of
the
evm
jin,
what
do
you
think
arto
should
be
working
on
since
his
yeah
so
are
to
actually
raise
the
hand
you
wanted
to
say
something.
F
I
I
had
a
question
for
bo,
so
I
was
looking
at
as
a
first
task.
I
was
looking
at
updating
the
evm
up
codes,
as
we
discussed
to
to
the
latest,
and
bo
has
been
working
on
gas
estimation.
As
I
understand
it,
and
as
he
was
saying
so,
my
question
would
be:
is
the
gas
estimation
currently
something
that
I
should
be
reviewing
as
well
or
is
that
all
up
to
date,
with
the
latest
er
eips
and
so
on?.
E
So
you
can
take
a
look
at
my
pr.
It's
3299,
I
believe
yeah.
F
E
Also
for
like
internally
so
for
internally
evm
gas,
so
we're
probably
talking
about
a
little
different
scope
for
evm
gas.
We
we
rely
on
parity
script
to
give
us
a
evm
gas
usage
of
each
evm
operation.
E
What
I
did
is
how
this
evm
gas
is
equivalent
to
how
many
amount
of
near
gas,
okay.
A
So
so,
if
you're
updating
the
evm.
F
Yeah
I'll
tackle
that
first
today,
as
a
quick
update
today,
I've
been
reading
all
the
different
issues
and
trying
to
get
a
handle
on
this
big
project
and
I'm
beginning
on
setting
up
the
development
environment.
Now
and
on
monday.
I
expect
to
be
producing
something.
A
A
So
I
think
next
week,
I'll
have
more
time
on
that
on
ibm.
It's
at
10am
and
they'll.
Pretty
much
give
an
update
on
like
how
we
actually
ship
it
in
more
technical
details.
So
I
already
talked
to
alex
shift
champion
about
this
and
that's
pretty
much
mostly
related
to
different
phases
of
release,
and
first
one
is
betternet
release
which
allows
us
to
fork
it
as
frequent
as
we
want.
A
So
we
can
push
straight
to
master
without
worrying
about
being
legacy
supported,
but
once
they
actually
migrate
out
of
betternet
into
let's
say
destiny,
so
we
are
ready
to
to
cut
it
at
this
moment.
We
pretty
much
cannot
have
a
changes
that
are
breaking
the
protocol,
so
like
any
change
to
the
config
or
two
fees
has
to
be
done
through
a
vertical
upgrade,
and
so
the
scope
should
be
when
we
want
to
pick
this.
A
C
C
Okay,
okay,
yeah
and
one
one
additional
thing.
Probably
all
of
you
know
that
during
the
next
monday
we
have
a
public
town
hall,
so
we
need
to
update
the
community
on
the
evm
status
and
taking
into
account
that
we
have
like,
in
general,
consensus
on
on
the
stages
of
the
development
of
the
evm.
C
I
would
propose
to
you
in
the
following
half
an
hour
or
maybe
less
than
that
and
approach
how
we
will
how
we
are
going
to
communicate
this,
and
this
is
only
the
proposal,
so
please,
inside
of
our
internal
channels,
vote
whether
it
is
okay
with
you
or
not,
and
let's,
let's
make
this
decision
how
we're
going
to
communicate
this?
That's
it
okay,
great!
Then
it
seems
like
we
finished
thanks
everybody
for
the
call.