Add EIP-7805 (FOCIL) specs #4003

terencechain · 2024-11-04T13:19:16Z

This PR introduces a preliminary version of the EIP-7805 consensus specs, covering the beacon chain, fork choice, and validator. While there are still open questions regarding the consensus design, we believe it's early enough to open this up for broader community feedback. Major credit to @soispoke, @fradamt, @Ma-Julian, @jihoonsong, and everyone else who provided feedback along the way

suggested changes

Co-authored-by: terence <[email protected]>

jtraglia

Some comments from an initial skim.

specs/_features/eip7805/beacon-chain.md

specs/_features/eip7805/fork-choice.md

jtraglia · 2024-11-04T14:22:03Z

specs/_features/eip7805/fork-choice.md

+```python
+def validate_inclusion_lists(store: Store, inclusion_list_transactions: List[Transaction, MAX_TRANSACTIONS_PER_INCLUSION_LIST * IL_COMMITTEE_SIZE], execution_payload: ExecutionPayload) -> bool:
+    """
+    Return ``True`` if and only if the input ``inclusion_list_transactions`` satifies validation, that to verify if the `execution_payload` satisfies `inclusion_list_transactions` validity conditions either when all transactions are present in payload or when any missing transactions are found to be invalid when appended to the end of the payload unless the block is full.


We should line wrap this. And execution_payload and inclusion_list_transactions should be wrapped in double back-ticks; they currently use single back-ticks.

jtraglia · 2024-11-04T14:22:18Z

specs/_features/eip7805/fork-choice.md

+### Modified `Store` 
+**Note:** `Store` is modified to track the seen inclusion lists.


Need a blank line between these lines.

specs/_features/eip7805/beacon-chain.md

jtraglia · 2024-11-04T14:24:07Z

specs/_features/eip7805/p2p-interface.md

+- _[REJECT]_ The signature of `inclusion_list.signature` is valid with respect to the validator index.
+
+
+### The Req/Resp domain


Delete the extra blank line.

jtraglia · 2024-11-04T14:27:44Z

specs/_features/eip7805/validator.md

+        epoch: Epoch,
+        validator_index: ValidatorIndex) -> Optional[Slot]:
+    """
+    Returns the slot during the requested epoch in which the validator with index `validator_index`


This needs double back-ticks too.

jtraglia · 2024-11-04T14:28:45Z

specs/_features/eip7805/validator.md

+The proposer should call `engine_updateInclusionListV1` at `PROPOSER_INCLUSION_LIST_CUT_OFF` into the slot with the list of the inclusion lists that gathered since `inclusion_list_CUT_OFF`
+
+
+## New inclusion list committee duty


Delete extra blank line here.

Also, the sentence on line 89 needs punctuation.

specs/_features/eip7805/validator.md

jtraglia · 2024-11-04T14:31:03Z

specs/_features/eip7805/p2p-interface.md

+
+| `fork_version`         | Chunk SSZ type                           |
+|------------------------|------------------------------------------|
+| `EIP-7805_FORK_VERSION` | `EIP-7805.SignedInclusionList` |


I don't believe this dash will work here. In most places, we need to replace EIP-7805 with EIP7805.

specs/_features/eip7805/beacon-chain.md

specs/_features/eip7805/validator.md

jtraglia · 2024-11-05T19:50:13Z

specs/_features/eip7805/fork-choice.md

+`on_inclusion_list` is called to import `signed_inclusion_list` to the fork choice store.
+```python


Need a blank line between the paragraph & code block.

specs/_features/eip7805/fork-choice.md

jtraglia · 2024-11-05T20:03:42Z

specs/_features/eip7805/fork-choice.md

+        inclusion_list_committee: Vector[ValidatorIndex, IL_COMMITTEE_SIZE]]) -> None:
+    """
+    ``on_inclusion_list`` verify the inclusion list before importing it to fork choice store.
+    If there exists more than 1 inclusion list in store with the same slot and validator index, remove the original one.


I believe this is an out-of-date comment. Where is "remove the original one" happening exactly? It appears that it adds the validator to inclusion_list_equivocators instead now.

I believe this is an out-of-date comment. Where is "remove the original one" happening exactly? It appears that it adds the validator to inclusion_list_equivocators instead now.

I thought it's the other way around?

p2p only accepts an IL if it's the first or second IL broadcasted by the peer.

The responsibility of picking out the equivocators should be on the p2p side. Beacon node just replace the first IL with the second IL if that happens

The comments are outdated, and different client implementations may handle this differently. Essentially, we want to:

Cache at least one inclusion list

Re-broadcast up to two inclusion lists over P2P

Track which inclusion lists have been equivocated (e.g., identify the specific validator)

When calling the EL to validate inclusion lists, ignore those that have been equivocated (discard them from being sent to the EL)

Regarding whether to prioritize the first or second inclusion list, I'm leaning towards the first as it seems simpler

The comment is outdated, yeah. It doesn't really matter which one we keep, we could also not keep either since anyway we ignore them once we know that it is an equivocation. For spec simplicity it seemed easier to just not do anything instead of removing, and also perhaps it makes sense to keep the first, just because if you're the builder you would probably rather use it even if there's an equivocation, just in case, and you'd rather use the first since you saw it earlier and from your perspective it is more likely to be enforced by someone

specs/_features/eip7805/fork-choice.md

ensi321 · 2024-11-08T04:07:49Z

specs/_features/eip7805/p2p-interface.md

+
+This topic is used to propagate signed inclusion list as `SignedInclusionList`.
+The following validations MUST pass before forwarding the `inclusion_list` on the network, assuming the alias `message = signed_inclusion_list.message`:
+


Aren't we also limiting IL size by MAX_BYTES_PER_INCLUSION_LIST = 8192 bytes as indicated in the EIP?

ensi321 · 2024-11-08T05:00:24Z

specs/_features/eip7805/p2p-interface.md

+
+#### Messages
+
+##### InclusionListByCommitteeIndices v1


Do we need another endpoint like InclusionListByRange since recently joined nodes need to request past ILs to sync blocks since the last checkpoint?

We do not. Inclusion lists only matter for the current slot. When a node is syncing blocks from past slots, the inclusion list check can be skipped

Co-authored-by: Justin Traglia <[email protected]>

eserilev · 2024-12-04T17:29:01Z

specs/_features/eip7805/beacon-chain.md

+#### `SignedInclusionList`
+
+```python
+class SignedInclusionList(Container):


Is there a reason why we introduce a SignedInclusionList container instead of just adding the signature field directly onto InclusionList?

terencechain and others added 20 commits September 30, 2024 10:49

Add focil containers

3a16a0e

Add process inclusion list aggregate

fa27c8f

Add inclusion list gossip conditions

3c86963

Add execution api

8a1e940

Add validator spec

833be94

Review feedback

a2b68a7

Update forkchoice

fb4a3c3

Update based on latest discussion. No more IL aggregate

c7a056b

Update fork-choice.md

f84556c

Update per https://ethresear.ch/t/focil-cl-el-workflow/20526

2787b0d

Address feedback

0b09f96

Clarify forkchoice and p2p

6056b69

Remove local

a8aec7c

suggested changes

cbe6129

Merge pull request #5 from fradamt/focil-patch

0efcf13

suggested changes

replace parent_root with il_committee_root

f151c7c

add timing logic (deaadlines) to IL processing

b181655

missing :

0681f8c

Co-authored-by: terence <[email protected]>

Merge pull request #6 from fradamt/focil-patch

2861684

Use eip7805

e678deb

terencechain force-pushed the focil-consensus branch from 165f25a to e678deb Compare November 4, 2024 13:30

jtraglia reviewed Nov 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

jtraglia reviewed Nov 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

ensi321 reviewed Nov 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

@jtraglia's suggestions

e9fdfc6

Co-authored-by: Justin Traglia <[email protected]>

terencechain force-pushed the focil-consensus branch from b3371b6 to e9fdfc6 Compare November 8, 2024 09:51

terencechain added 3 commits November 19, 2024 07:12

Update new inclusion list comments

6ce0077

P2p spec feedbacks

be471b8

Add get attester head

c443db0

Fix typo and make CI happy

c8b6296

eserilev reviewed Dec 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

eserilev mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2024

FOCIL - Tracking Issue sigp/lighthouse#6660

Open

9 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add EIP-7805 (FOCIL) specs #4003

Add EIP-7805 (FOCIL) specs #4003

terencechain commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

jtraglia left a comment

jtraglia Nov 4, 2024

jtraglia Nov 4, 2024

jtraglia Nov 4, 2024

jtraglia Nov 4, 2024

jtraglia Nov 4, 2024

jtraglia Nov 4, 2024

jtraglia Nov 4, 2024

jtraglia Nov 5, 2024

jtraglia Nov 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ensi321 Nov 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

terencechain Nov 8, 2024

fradamt Nov 8, 2024

ensi321 Nov 8, 2024

ensi321 Nov 8, 2024

terencechain Nov 8, 2024

eserilev Dec 4, 2024

		### Modified `Store`
		Note: `Store` is modified to track the seen inclusion lists.

		- _[REJECT]_ The signature of `inclusion_list.signature` is valid with respect to the validator index.


		### The Req/Resp domain

		The proposer should call `engine_updateInclusionListV1` at `PROPOSER_INCLUSION_LIST_CUT_OFF` into the slot with the list of the inclusion lists that gathered since `inclusion_list_CUT_OFF`


		## New inclusion list committee duty

		`on_inclusion_list` is called to import `signed_inclusion_list` to the fork choice store.
		```python


		This topic is used to propagate signed inclusion list as `SignedInclusionList`.
		The following validations MUST pass before forwarding the `inclusion_list` on the network, assuming the alias `message = signed_inclusion_list.message`:


		#### Messages

		##### InclusionListByCommitteeIndices v1

Add EIP-7805 (FOCIL) specs #4003

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add EIP-7805 (FOCIL) specs #4003

Conversation

terencechain commented Nov 4, 2024 • edited Loading

jtraglia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jtraglia Nov 5, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ensi321 Nov 8, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

terencechain commented Nov 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

jtraglia Nov 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ensi321 Nov 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading