Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

introduce ForkedBlobSidecar for EIP-7688 Electra period before PeerDAS #6451

Draft
wants to merge 19 commits into
base: unstable
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

etan-status
Copy link
Contributor

On ELECTRA_FORK_EPOCH, PeerDAS is not yet activated, hence the current mechanism based on BlobSidecar is still in use. With EIP-7688, the generalized indices of BeaconBlockBody get reindexed, changing the length of the inclusion proof within the BlobSidecar. Because network Req/Resp operations allow responses across fork boundaries, this creates the need for a ForkedBlobSidecar in that layer, same as already done for ForkedSignedBeaconBock for similar reasons.

Note: This PR is only needed if PeerDAS is adopted after EIP-7688. If PeerDAS is adopted before EIP-7688, a similar PR may be needed for forked columns. Coincidental Forked jank can only be fully avoided if both features activate at the same epoch, actual changes to blobs aside. Delaying EIP-7688 for sole purpose of epoch alignemnt is not worth it.

On `ELECTRA_FORK_EPOCH`, PeerDAS is not yet activated, hence the current
mechanism based on `BlobSidecar` is still in use. With EIP-7688, the
generalized indices of `BeaconBlockBody` get reindexed, changing the
length of the inclusion proof within the `BlobSidecar`. Because network
Req/Resp operations allow responses across fork boundaries, this creates
the need for a `ForkedBlobSidecar` in that layer, same as already done
for `ForkedSignedBeaconBock` for similar reasons.

Note: This PR is only needed if PeerDAS is adopted _after_ EIP-7688.
If PeerDAS is adopted _before_ EIP-7688, a similar PR may be needed for
forked columns. Coincidental `Forked` jank can only be fully avoided if
both features activate at the same epoch, actual changes to blobs aside.
Delaying EIP-7688 for sole purpose of epoch alignemnt is not worth it.
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jul 25, 2024

Unit Test Results

         9 files  ±0    1 337 suites  ±0   43m 56s ⏱️ + 13m 34s
  5 066 tests +2    4 718 ✔️ +2  348 💤 ±0  0 ±0 
20 997 runs  +6  20 593 ✔️ +6  404 💤 ±0  0 ±0 

Results for commit 18af8dc. ± Comparison against base commit 44cc72c.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants