Title: Istanbul___ETH1x_Roadmap_Planning_Meeting___April_
Category: Working_Groups

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-11T18:48:54.634Z

The discussion that started in January has resulted in a meeting being planned for April 17th & 18th in Berlin.
The dates are confirmed so please feel free to book travel. There may be a reception on the evening of the 16th or other shoulder events, but nothing else is confirmed.
The goals are:

discuss process & timing of Istanbul hardfork – EIP233 improvements, security, testing
discuss various multi-hardfork plans such as state fees, eWASM, EVM evolution
presentations from technical experts & EIP proposers for Istanbul
client implementation scheduling and concerns

This is a technical meeting for CoreDevs, ETH1 client developers, EIP proposers, and other technical experts.
Aside from being there in person, we will be setup to include some remote presenters.
Presentations will be captured / livestreamed but not break out sessions. Will post notes after the fact, and run an AMA afterwards similar to the Feb 6th Webinar.

Anyone doing technical work as described above is welcome to attend. Please let us know that you’re coming to plan for space and topics.
Signup form: https://goo.gl/forms/AZv018Cgd2B3YzuZ2

Schedule
The two day schedule is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSZ8umEwLjA6pncgm1BQ5tkRb4Lw97LzyFvOx9zJZyE0z0yNIlY9dsVJ7_hogRq-6svKubFkELeXzHu/pubhtml?gid=977790192#
All times in Central Europe Time (Berlin).

Topics will be updated with links to presentations / livestream as they become available
Topics
This is an initial list of topics and presenters.
Presentations being made in order:
April 17th Wednesday Day 1

State Rent - @AlexeyAkhunov - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1u7d-jLMdGkPYl0zf49b1CFKtqlln4ICO

EVM Evolution - @expede


EIP 615 Static Jumps and Subroutines - @expede @gcolvin (part of EVM Evolution discussion)
Brooke’s presentation https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_taRpfsEF-ofF0UpwKyGOH-ogPqxmpUD



EVM Invariants


EIP 1712 - Disallow deployment of unused opcodes - Immutability/invariant - @sorpaas



Consenus Testing - Dmitry cover’s Retesteth https://drive.google.com/open?id=1w_I_9ny1c5bPEavBfy2QLk0OPOzGrM0q

Security Review - @tintinweb - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1EiIw2LIw2e98nLaR0VU94PJrpBj-ABo_

Large Scale System Testing - Zack Cole, White Block https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lrfJ-Z4lscnLHbUae11uPn8QaUpQjdH2

ETHv64 - Matt Halpern - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-TuInhKVAbLs0s5L-Bk1e0x3aXlCYW2R


Red Queen Sync - sidebar discussion
Day 2

eWASM - @axic @lrettig

Precompiles - meta discussion on including more pre-compiles for crypto primitives and ETH2 support - @axic for eWASM view, @expede @Recmo  for “native” precompiles
EIP Process Improvements: EIP233 - @boris @axic @lrettig

Technical Mainnet HF Process - @decanus

Mainnet HF Comms - Lead?
6 or 9 month HFs, plus non HF rollouts like networking updates, JSON-RPC - @lrettig

Networking - Hobbits wire protocol for ETH 2.0 - Antoine Toulme

Proposed EIP Presentations
Not confirmed to present, copy/pasta from roadmap wiki


EIP 1829 Precompile for Elliptic Curve Linear Combinations - @Recmo


EIP 1057 ProgPoW, a Programmatic Proof-of-Work - @shemnon


EIP 1559 - Fee market change - see also EthMagicians discussion - @ vbuterin

Related Links

Istanbul Roadmap timeline - https://en.ethereum.wiki/roadmap/istanbul

Small vs Large Hardforks More frequent, smaller hardforks vs. less frequent, larger ones


Event Details
When: April 17th & 18th
Where: Berlin, Germany
Venue: Full Node – thank you Martin & Gnosis team for supporting this
These are working meetings, please sign up to let us know you’re coming https://goo.gl/forms/AZv018Cgd2B3YzuZ2
The presentations will be livestreamed at the Ethereum Foundation Youtube account starting soon.

Author: lrettig
Date: 2019-03-11T20:03:52.176Z

I’ll be there. You can put @axic (?) and me down for Ewasm.

Author: tvanepps
Date: 2019-03-12T02:24:17.657Z

Security Review


Just came across this today. 25k for EIP audits, not sure any more specifics though
https://twitter.com/chain_security/status/1105146210485182465

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-12T03:15:59.600Z

Yeah I’m wondering if that’s per EIP.
My other question is if anyone is going to champion 1283 to go in again.

Author: timbeiko
Date: 2019-03-12T15:06:20.459Z

Not sure if this is the right thread to bring this up, but on Github @boris mentioned that

If we want to meet again, that timing should be decided soon, so that people can plan ahead.
Depending on what the goals of the meeting are, either late July (post July 19th implementation deadline) or mid September (post Aug 14th testnet upgrade).

Are there Ethereum events already planned either mid-late July or early-mid September? If so, it may make sense to have this future meeting be in the same location & at the same time.

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-12T17:31:52.800Z

Yes, it’s a good spot for it 
It’s been my experience so far that meetings aligned with conferences lengthen the time for everyone and are generally exhausting.
I don’t know if I’m the only one that feels that way, but I’d prefer these meetings – if we need to have them in person – should be planned to meet the needs of the meeting and the participants.
I think rotating location – i.e. not always in Europe! – should be a factor, it shouldn’t overlap a weekend (this is a job!), and probably some other guidelines.
Getting on a plane at all is costly, so who supports the cost of this travel is another question.

Author: timbeiko
Date: 2019-03-12T18:29:25.386Z

Great points! The reason why I proposed having this close to conferences is that for people who would otherwise be attending the conference for work, it is often cheaper to simply extend the trip.
I agree we should look how to support the cost of travel and rotate locations.

Author: maurelian
Date: 2019-03-13T20:41:50.920Z

boris:

My other question is if anyone is going to champion 1283 to go in again.


I really like 1283, or something else that enables a cheaper mutex. But that’s quite different from championing.

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-14T00:19:11.022Z

Chanting: @maurelian, maurelian, maurelian, maurelian!
Original author @sorpaas will be in Berlin I think, but needs to be encouraged that there are people interested in it as well as of course security reviews.
Maybe an opportunity to write the specification in K that you / Consensys Diligence could help with?

Author: maurelian
Date: 2019-03-15T16:28:18.208Z

I like all these ideas. /fires up twitter.

Author: lrettig
Date: 2019-03-18T20:46:59.021Z

One of the Ewasm folks (@axic?) could probably lead the precompiles conversation as we’ve been discussing this at great length as part of the Ewasm Eth1x plans.
Please also add me to “EIP Process Improvements” and HF schedule. Thanks.

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-18T22:55:30.304Z

Great, added those above – it should be wiki editable by anyone. For reference, that precompiles discussion needs to be broader than just WASM. For the WASM plan in general, there should be a multi-hardfork schedule and some discussion of what is needed. I’m going to ping the team because @expede would like to sync up and ask some questions before Berlin so we can coordinate forward compatibility from EVM Evolution.
Re: leads – basically, just trying to get at least one or two names beside topics that need discussion / planning.

Author: lrettig
Date: 2019-03-20T13:42:32.279Z

boris:

it should be wiki editable by anyone


Confirmed that it is editable. Sorry about that! And thanks for making the updates for lazy me.

Author: zscole
Date: 2019-03-20T16:41:57.205Z

I’d like to volunteer to present on testing. This will also overlap with simulation. We have some updates for the state tests that we’ve been planning with @AlexeyAkhunov and will have some results to share by then. We’ve also made some progress on other testing related initiatives, including some relevent work we’re doing with the EEA.

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-20T17:46:22.999Z

Great @zscole! Please edit to put your name next to Testing and add a line + your name to Simulation. If you haven’t already – please sign up on the google form.

Author: tvanepps
Date: 2019-03-25T17:17:26.117Z

@vbuterin - @econoar mentioned you might want to present on 1559 remotely? Is this still the case?

Author: sorpaas
Date: 2019-03-27T01:02:41.166Z

I can confirm to make it on 17th (but cannot confirm 18th), and I want to add EIP-1712 to the list. It’s a relatively simple one and related to our immutability/invariant discussions. A current benefit is in inter-blockchain / private-chain setup, where it can prevent someone accidentally deploy a contract to a chain that is incompatible. This is something I’ve heard a lot of complaints of.

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-27T01:21:12.260Z

Great, thank you. Will make sure to schedule for the 17th.

Author: AlexeyAkhunov
Date: 2019-03-27T14:30:30.538Z

Andrew Ashikhmin will make a presentation about his Red Queen Sync protocol. This is currently under State rent working group, but we might want to split it up to another working group.
I would also like to launch another working group related to the use of beacon chain as a finality gadget for Ethereum 1x

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-27T14:41:39.506Z

Great, thanks for the update.



 AlexeyAkhunov:

I would also like to launch another working group related to the use of beacon chain as a finality gadget for Ethereum 1x


Yes there is a lot of excitement about this for sure.

Author: virgil
Date: 2019-03-28T11:34:53.617Z

I will be in Korea on those dates, but I’ll be remotely presenting on:

EIP 152: the Blake2 precompile
Introducing an optional process reducing the necessary labour from by our fine EIP maintainers using OASIS Open Projects.

Author: boris
Date: 2019-03-29T01:20:37.526Z

Great. Just started on getting a schedule together with @tvanepps – will need to make sure we can schedule at a time that isn’t too bad for you. Hmmm Korea is +8 hours ahead of Central Europe. OK, so you could do a morning Europe time slot and it wouldn’t be too late, even 11am is only 7pm in Korea. Let us know if certain times on 17th or 18th are better / worse.
Thinking we can maybe talk about all the precompiles together, as there are some related questions about this. Having spoken to some core client devs
Can you say more about OASIS and what you mean? Do you want a separate slot to discuss that?

Author: owocki
Date: 2019-04-08T20:12:40.532Z

(hope its okay to bring this up on this thread; if not, I will create a new thread) Does anyone need a roommate while in Berlin?  If so, DM me on twitter => twitter.com/owocki

Author: shemnon
Date: 2019-04-09T02:54:09.661Z

I noticed other than the Red Queen Sync protocol there isn’t much on the table for whatever would make up Eth/64 (Forming a Ring: ETH v64 Wire Protocol Ring).  Do we want to add that to the agenda?  Perhaps @matthalp could do a remote presentation?

Author: matthalp
Date: 2019-04-09T04:42:35.761Z

My understanding is that are currently three sync proposals/prototypes (1. fast warp 2. red queen 3. fire hose) under development where either one or some combination will be selected to be the new syncing paradigm.
There are about ten other ETH v64 proposals that have been on standby while the sync proposals progress. They are mostly simple in nature and do not seem too contentious, but now is probably a time to get the to a more mature state.
As a step towards that I’m happy to present these proposals to educate and help get buy in from the community. If this is something everyone else would be interested all I ask is that I can get a reasonable time slot to present since I’m in the Pacific time zone.

Author: boris
Date: 2019-04-09T04:59:18.272Z

@tvanepps can help you get scheduling sorted. Morning in PST around 7am should be doable.
I’m based in PST normally AKA the worst time zone, so I feel your pain

Author: tvanepps
Date: 2019-04-09T14:29:56.506Z

Great to hear @matthalp.
If you could fill this form out it will help me stay organised. Mention your timezone as well:


docs.google.com



Istanbul & ETH1x Roadmap Planning
This is a technical meeting for CoreDevs, ETH1 client developers, EIP proposers, and other technical experts. This is being publicly announced, in-person attendance will be curated using this signup to focus on active contributors.

The goals are:

*...





Thanks!

Author: sorpaas
Date: 2019-04-15T20:25:31.667Z

Besides EIP-1712, I’ll also give an overview of all of our current account versioning options. This includes EIP-1702/#154, EIP-1707 and EIP-1891.

Author: matthalp
Date: 2019-04-17T03:45:51.248Z

Any updates on livestream information?

Author: boris
Date: 2019-04-17T04:19:01.421Z

We’ll post when we have it. @tvanepps will have it.

Author: jpitts
Date: 2019-04-17T05:43:14.704Z

Also, could you post what the hashtag will be? Good luck with the sessions, and thanks!

Author: boris
Date: 2019-04-17T06:05:57.635Z

#coredevsberlin — we’ll use that here too to tag posts.

Author: ligi
Date: 2019-04-17T08:42:04.751Z

here the link to the live-stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au1Qll-86v0
cc @matthalp

Author: virgil
Date: 2019-04-18T01:52:24.134Z

Prepared statements for the ETH Istanbul magicians meetings
Today I am in air transit with a yet undetermined schedule, so in the event I am unable to speak live on my request for the precompile, I have prepared these notes.

Special Projects wishes greater Ethereum interopability with Zcash, IPFS, and Handshake. Coincidentally, all of these projects use the Blake2 hash function.  So, this is our official request to add the Blake2b F precompile to the Istanbul hardfork.  The first special project here will probably be creating a wrapped ZEC (WZEC) within Ethereum as well as wrapped Ether within Zcash.  After that, some yet-to-be-determined bridge architecture will allow Ethereum to benefit from Zcash’s shielded transactions.
If there’s an issue of funding to get this over the finish line, I will personally cover the expenses.

That’s it really.  Send questions to virgil@ethereum.org.

Author: virgil
Date: 2019-04-18T05:30:42.323Z

Prepared statements for the Istanbul magicians meetings
Today I am in air transit with a yet undetermined schedule, so in the event I am unable to speak live on my introduction of the “EIP OASIS plan”, I have prepared these notes.
My original proposal (approved by EF management) for an experimental EIP/ERC-approval process running in parallel to the existing EIP process is here: https://notes.ethereum.org/rkFOS_WLV

You can see the majority of the context there.  Use of the experimental OASIS-EIP process is entirely optional.  If maintainers prefer, they can keep with the same system.  If, after 18 months, it is deemed that the OASIS-EIP process isn’t much better than our current one, we will discontinue the experiment and return to single-process system we use now.  If, after 18 months, it’s determined that the OASIS-EIP process is a notable improvement, we can discuss making OASIS-EIP the sole EIP/ERC-approval process.
After deciding that becoming an IETF working group would generate more problems than solutions, Ethereum Foundation decided to go with OASIS as OASIS is one of the few organizations that, rather than enforce gate-keeping (like IETF, ISO, etc), OASIS uses their standards specialists as shepherds and referees to bring out the best in your standards.
Project Governing Board (PGB)
Some have asked how the initial Project Governance Board was decided.  I don’t consider any of the picks to be controversial, but here’s the reasoning for each initial member:
* Ethereum Foundation - Would be bizarre to not have EF represented.  I, Virgil Griffith, will be the initial EF representative, but I hope to abdicate this role as soon as possible.
* Consensys - With the exception of EF, Consensys employees have authored more EIPs than any other org.  We wish to reward this behavior.
* Ethereum Enterprise Alliance - Although coming from the more corporate world, the EEA has a lot of standards experience and expertise.  It seems sensible to leverage this experience.  Additionally, having EEA more involved in Ethereum EIPs will improve their ability to keep their own EEA standards compatible and up to date with ours.
* Nick Johnson - Nick has been the primary steward of the EIP process for sometime.  The goal is for him is to represent the values of the existing pre-OASIS process and overall be a voice of “the people” within the PGB.
As there are an even number of PGB members, if there is a tie, OASIS referees will cast the tie-breaking vote.
Technical Steering Committee (TSC)
One pleasant change in this process is that, whereas the Magicians EIP Ring was before merely the unofficial custodian of the EIP process, in the OASIS process the EIP Ring becomes the Technical Steering Committee, which has official, specific powers.  This enshrines the Magicians (or at least the EIP Ring) with official standing.  I have complete confidence in the Magicians for rising to the challenge of wielding these new powers.
The person to field all OASIS-related questions to is Jory Burson jory.burson@oasis-open.org.

Author: cdili
Date: 2019-04-18T13:46:50.636Z

Copied to separate thread



OASIS-EIP stewarding process Process Improvement


    (written by @virgil)  Today I am in air transit with a yet undetermined schedule, so in the event I am unable to speak live on my introduction of the “EIP OASIS plan”, I have prepared these notes. 
My original proposal (approved by EF management) for an  experimental  EIP/ERC-approval process running  in parallel  to the existing EIP process is here: https://notes.ethereum.org/rkFOS_WLV  
You can see the majority of the context there. Use of the experimental OASIS-EIP process is  entirely option…