Update ADR-025 and mark it as Accepted#3958
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3958 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 67% 66.95% -0.05%
==========================================
Files 219 219
Lines 18486 18486
==========================================
- Hits 12386 12377 -9
- Misses 5178 5189 +11
+ Partials 922 920 -2
|
| created. This was the consensus from | ||
| [#3485](https://github.com/tendermint/tendermint/issues/3485) | ||
|
|
||
| We may want to consider supporting other blockIDs later, as a way to capture |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Won't it be possible to capture evidence without including votes for other blockIDs into CommitSig? The same question for nil. If it's possible, then we won't have to include votes for nil / other block IDs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We want to include nil to signal about validator liveness since its not necessarily a validators fault if they voted nil. But it is their fault for voting a different block ID (unless +1/3 are malicious). I'm not sure exactly the case here where it would help to capture this in the commit but I figured I'd just leave the note so that we think about it later. Meanwhile, I think we move forward with including votes for nil but not votes for other blockids.
Co-Authored-By: Anton Kaliaev <anton.kalyaev@gmail.com>
milosevic
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Very nice and complete.
|
This seems acceptable but we are most likely going to want to make future breaking changes. This block header structure is seems nearly a perfect fit for "enterprise" Tendermint use case but will probably need to change if we see increased demand for many validators public chains. |
Can you clarify? You mean aggregation and/or randomness or something else ? I think basically we're looking for a structure that will tide us over sufficiently until aggregation. Also note Dev's proposal here if you haven't seen - would appreciate more review of it: #7892 |
Added some more context and reference to issues, and marked it as accepted. We should start moving forward on this and roll out a plan for getting it tested on gaia testnets and ultimately proposed to the cosmos hub for a breaking upgrade (ie. the hub's first breaking upgrade of tendermint itself). cc @zmanian @marbar3778 @milosevic. We can probably include a couple other small block protocol breaking changes, but we shouldn't really block on it.
Summary of the result here: