Ethereum All Core Developers Execution Call #194 Writeup
On August 15, 2024, Ethereum protocol developers met virtually over Zoom for All Core Developers Execution (ACDE) Call #194. This week, the call was chaired by Ethereum Foundation (EF) Researcher Alex Stokes. The ACDE calls are a bi-weekly meeting series where developers discuss and coordinate changes to the execution layer (EL) of Ethereum.
Developers kicked off the call with updates on the testing progress for the Pectra upgrade. Then, they discussed the readiness of EOF code changes for inclusion in a Pectra devnet and updated analysis on the gas costs for EIP 2537 operations. Prysm developer “Potuz” presented on EIP 7732, a formal proposal to enshrine proposer builder separation on Ethereum. Erigon developer Giulio Rebuffo proposed a way to remove the field “totalDifficulty” from the Execution API to reduce the technical debt of Ethereum clients from pre-Merge days and Geth developer Marius van der Wijden proposed a way to remove pre-Merge fields from the Ethereum Wire Protocol to reduce node bandwidth during sync. Developers briefly discussed rebasing PeerDAS specifications on top of Pectra instead of Dencun and finally, they shared updates on their implementation progress for EIP 4444.
Pectra Devnets
Pectra Devnet 2 is stable. There appears to be one outstanding issue on the Devnet 2 information page related to merging block builder specifications and testing them on devnets. EF Developer Operations Engineer Parithosh Jayanthi said there are also issues with Teku/Erigon nodes and the Prysm client.
Developers are aiming to launch Pectra Devnet 3 with updated specifications for EIP 7702 in two weeks. Developers plan on adding EOF to the devnet thereafter, Pectra Devnet 4, if all goes according to plan.
Geth developer Marius van der Wijden shared updated analysis on the gas costs for EIP 2537. As background, the EIP creates a new precompile for BLS12-381 curve operations. It enables smart contract developers to perform operations such as signature aggregation over the BLS12-381 curve in a cost-effective way. Van der Wijden proposed a repricing of the precompile based on benchmarks he and his colleague on the Geth team, Jared Wasinger, made for BLS operations and their gas usage on various machines. Van der Wijden encouraged other developers to run their own benchmarks on EIP 2537 gas usage to verify results.
EIP 7732
Prysm developer “Potuz” shared updates on EIP 7732, an in-protocol solution to directly connect validators to third-party block builders. Since the Merge, validators have relied on intermediary actors called relays to receive blocks containing MEV rewards. EIP 7732 removes the need for relays so that validators can earn MEV in a more trustless manner. Potuz highlighted that the current design of EIP 7732 requires no changes to the execution layer (EL) or Engine API. He added that EIP 7732 is also compatible with inclusion lists, a proposal to enable validators to force inclusion of transactions in a block. More information about EIP 7732 can be found in this Google slide presentation.
Reducing Pre-Merge Tech Debt
Since Ethereum’s transition to proof-of-stake, there are parts of the Ethereum codebase that are no longer useful or necessary. For example, the difficulty bomb, which was a mechanism to force development work on proof-of-stake by making it infeasible to create blocks through proof-of-work mining after a certain period. The following two proposals are aimed at removing such parts of the codebase to improve node performance and reduce protocol complexity.
Erigon developer Giulio Rebuffo proposed the removal of the “totalDifficulty” field from the Execution API.
Geth developer Marius van der Wijden proposed the remove of a few pre-Merge fields and messages from the Ethereum Wire Protocol.
There was positive feedback on both proposals from other developers on the call. Developers agreed to review both in more detail asynchronously after from the meeting.
PeerDAS
On the topic of PeerDAS, a Nimbus developer by the screen name “Dustin” proposed hastening the rebase of PeerDAS on top of Pectra EIPs instead of continuing to develop PeerDAS on top of Deneb. He acknowledged that there are EIPs in Pectra that are unstable and subject to change such as EIP 7702 and EOF. Dustin recommended rebasing PeerDAS on the subset of Pectra EIPs that are stable and excluding EIP 7702 and EOF transactions on PeerDAS devnets. Developers discussed other ways to start rebasing PeerDAS on Pectra. There was general support to start moving in this direction.
Stokes reminded call participants that starting next Monday at 2PM (UTC) there will be a recurring Pectra testing call to coordinate further on devnet specifications and timing.
EIP 4444
There were no major updates on EIP 4444, history expiry. Representatives from the Nethermind and Nimbus team said they are in the process of building out their integrations with the Portal Network, an alternative networking protocol for users to access expired history data.
Legal Disclosure:
This document, and the information contained herein, has been provided to you by Galaxy Digital Holdings LP and its affiliates (“Galaxy Digital”) solely for informational purposes. This document may not be reproduced or redistributed in whole or in part, in any format, without the express written approval of Galaxy Digital. Neither the information, nor any opinion contained in this document, constitutes an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, any advisory services, securities, futures, options or other financial instruments or to participate in any advisory services or trading strategy. Nothing contained in this document constitutes investment, legal or tax advice or is an endorsementof any of the digital assets or companies mentioned herein. You should make your own investigations and evaluations of the information herein. Any decisions based on information contained in this document are the sole responsibility of the reader. Certain statements in this document reflect Galaxy Digital’s views, estimates, opinions or predictions (which may be based on proprietary models and assumptions, including, in particular, Galaxy Digital’s views on the current and future market for certain digital assets), and there is no guarantee that these views, estimates, opinions or predictions are currently accurate or that they will be ultimately realized. To the extent these assumptions or models are not correct or circumstances change, the actual performance may vary substantially from, and be less than, the estimates included herein. None of Galaxy Digital nor any of its affiliates, shareholders, partners, members, directors, officers, management, employees or representatives makes any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of any of the information or any other information (whether communicated in written or oral form) transmitted or made available to you. Each of the aforementioned parties expressly disclaims any and all liability relating to or resulting from the use of this information. Certain information contained herein (including financial information) has been obtained from published and non-published sources. Such information has not been independently verified by Galaxy Digital and, Galaxy Digital, does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of such information. Affiliates of Galaxy Digital may have owned or may own investments in some of the digital assets and protocols discussed in this document. Except where otherwise indicated, the information in this document is based on matters as they exist as of the date of preparation and not as of any future date, and will not be updated or otherwise revised to reflect information that subsequently becomes available, or circumstances existing or changes occurring after the date hereof. This document provides links to other Websites that we think might be of interest to you. Please note that when you click on one of these links, you may be moving to a provider’s website that is not associated with Galaxy Digital. These linked sites and their providers are not controlled by us, and we are not responsible for the contents or the proper operation of any linked site. The inclusion of any link does not imply our endorsement or our adoption of the statements therein. We encourage you to read the terms of use and privacy statements of these linked sites as their policies may differ from ours. The foregoing does not constitute a “research report” as defined by FINRA Rule 2241 or a “debt research report” as defined by FINRA Rule 2242 and was not prepared by Galaxy Digital Partners LLC. For all inquiries, please email [email protected]. ©Copyright Galaxy Digital Holdings LP 2024. All rights reserved.