Zoom Logo

Robert Drost's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view - Recording 2/2
Robert Drost
10:42
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ErnINROrH3KiMei_jGr6Xwcg0rGb9kd1NUICU7Rky7c/edit#
JosephC
14:55
Can someone DM Artem this call link? His permissions dont allow me and want to avoid public posting and zoom bombers
lightclient
19:55
hahaha
Rick Dudley
19:59
That's bad for offline clients... How would I generate all the required block witness if I was offline for 4 periods?
Tim Beiko
20:28
Isn’t 1 period ~1yr?
Rick Dudley
20:49
Yeah, we just don't have any of the tooling to address my question...
JosephC
21:11
+1 Rick. Say people only checking some accounts from 2017 now…
Rick Dudley
21:54
I think if we just make sure the block witness generation service exists, it's fine.
Rick Dudley
22:20
I'm building a service that could do this.
Rick Dudley
22:52
I think it's fine as a mechanism if we assume the other tooling will exist, but it should be stated explicitly that other tooling is needed.
Robert Drost
24:11
+1 on stating assumptions about add’l service(s)/tooling needed
Ansgar Dietrichs
25:30
I actually think the proposal and its related writeups are fairly explicit about responsibility for state going over to users for state older than 2 periods
Rick Dudley
25:52
Yeah, the reality is users will rely on a service.
Alex B. (axic)
25:59
FYI ipsilon is the new name of the ewasm team, in case anyone is wondering :)
Ansgar Dietrichs
26:19
ah, I was indeed wondering exactly about that :-)
Pooja Ranjan
26:33
good to know1
lightclient
26:46
whoa when did you guys get this name?
Alex B. (axic)
27:39
started to use publicly a month ago, but renaming was planned for a very long time
lightclient
27:50
congrats :)
Alex B. (axic)
28:33
🙌
Ansgar Dietrichs
28:51
also, the first period would not have to be 1 year - so this last hart fork could happen only once all the tooling is in place
Piper Merriam
34:32
https://github.com/ethereum-cdap/cohort-zero/issues/62
Rick Dudley
37:16
Thanks for inviting me. This seems pretty good.
Ansgar Dietrichs
44:40
I think this is awesome btw - having a couple of very cheap sload locations would be great for many dapps
Piper Merriam
45:13
DELEGATECALL style smart contract decomposition becomes potentially viable in this model while still being gas efficient
Alex B. (axic)
45:56
Bad news is that cureent proxy contracts
Alex B. (axic)
46:08
That current proxy contracts do not work with this
Ansgar Dietrichs
46:44
why not? don’t they use storage slot 0 by default for storing their target address?
Alex B. (axic)
46:55
no :)
Ansgar Dietrichs
47:05
oh, wasn’t aware
Alex B. (axic)
47:21
Hard to type on phone, but the conversation can be found on the #evm channel on 2nd june
Alex B. (axic)
47:49
Proxies use a hash for the slot to avoid storage collisions with regular contract variables
Ansgar Dietrichs
48:29
ah right, makes sense
Alex B. (axic)
49:29
Only basic storage variables benefit from being in the main tree, so like owner mostly
Alex B. (axic)
52:42
and arrays/bytes/string (in solidity terms) benefit from the adjacent property
JosephC
54:10
Should state expiry EIP, at least the period2 hard fork, be dependent on an EIP for a truly decentralized block witness service/tooling and it running in production for some time? (Or will most people be putting trust in Rick's service? ;) )
Peter Davies
56:31
Suppose I send a transaction, but after I send the transaction the state changes so my transaction requires a resurrection that I didn't include, what happens?
Alex B. (axic)
56:59
The verkle tree EIP is not dependent on the address space change as long as it just pads current addresses, as stated in the doc. Can the verkle tree implementation/experimentayion kick off already? It seems to make sense even if expiry does not materialises.
Piper Merriam
57:44
Unified and balanced trie will also allow portal network state management to be get significantly more efficient, both in how it is stored by individual nodes, and in reducing access from being something like O(average-depth-of-the-trie) to be ~O(1) for each piece of information accessed.
Alex B. (axic)
58:41
Why little endian?
Piper Merriam
59:10
Similarly, once tries become frozen, a more "torrent" style seeding of cold state also becomes possible since the cold state data no longer changes.
Ansgar Dietrichs
59:12
@axic I think the case for starting Verkle tree prototyping separately now already is strong (and Guillaume has already done some work there I think!). That’s a benefit of this modular approach, that we then can have separate prototyping of address extension and then finally full state expiry
Peter Davies
59:28
Assuming the answer to my question is "it just fails", do we need to investigate how bad a problem this is?
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:00:38
@Peter, I think you are correct that it would fail - this is a good example of what we called Dynamic State Access back in the execution environment context. basically, applications with DSA patterns would indeed become more fragile once they get dropped out of active state
Paweł Bylica
01:00:45
Can the name "address space" be changed to "address period"? The "address space" has different meaning to me and is very confusing in this context.
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:03:09
@Joseph I think this is a tradeoff we have to make at some point (how much tooling do we want to wait for). I personally am weakly in favor of moving quicker and alleviating strain on full nodes as soon as we can, and really hold users ultimately responsible for expired state. Although my guess is that sufficient tooling would be in place anyway by the time the phase 0 tree expires.
Piper Merriam
01:03:19
We should add investigation to using a precompile to retain support for legacy transaction types.
Andrei Maiboroda
01:03:30
Can you send new tx type from the old (short) address?
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:04:19
I think there would be an automatic conversion of old addresses to the new address type under the extension proposals
Alex B. (axic)
01:04:24
What is the reason to allow creating addresses in various spaces? In our overview we argued to not introduce create3.
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:04:50
I think the idea is to allow for old contracts to access the most recent space
Alex B. (axic)
01:04:54
But to keep the address space of the caller.
Alex B. (axic)
01:05:15
Not sure how it allows that?
JosephC
01:05:54
same day and time next week?
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:07:14
ah wait, I worded that somewhat wrong. I think the idea is rather to have child contracts in the most recent address space
Piper Merriam
01:07:28
continue the conversation and questions/discussion in the #state-expiry channel
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:07:48
because being in the most recent one makes access to previously unset storage locations cheaper (not requiring non-inclusion witnesses)
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:08:13
so this is kind of a must-have to allow for contracts to be efficiently usable over multiple periods
Alex B. (axic)
01:08:24
@ansgar we were wondering to solve incentives for migration instead of complicating cross creation
Alex B. (axic)
01:08:41
No answers yet :)
Ansgar Dietrichs
01:08:45
I could definitely see that being a viable alternative approach
Kenneth Ng
01:08:48
Thanks for organizing Robert and thanks v
lightclient
01:08:52
c ya