Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
76 lines (49 loc) · 2.77 KB

Meeting 2016 05 2.md

File metadata and controls

76 lines (49 loc) · 2.77 KB
Raw

wanderer edited this page on Apr 26, 2016

  1. All items in ethereum/EIPs#86

  2. ethereum/EIPs#8

  3. ethereum/EIPs#90

  4. Other EIPs that people want?

  5. ECADD, ECMUL, MODEXP precompile additions

  6. BIGINT_ADD, BIGINT_MUL, BIGINT_MODEXP precompile additions

  7. RLP descent precompile additions

  8. Other precompiles that people want?

  9. Timing (development, testing, release)

  10. Timing and content of future hardforks (incl possible webassembly)

  11. Security Audits

  12. not a hard fork but perhaps good thing to have: ethereum/EIPs#92 (upper bound on block gas / transaction gas)

kumavis asked about webrtc+lightclient conclusion: out of scope of conversation recommend: separate conversation

Vitalik: protocol changes

Issue 90: Is EIP90 going into metropolis? Comment: Needs to be more formalized.

Issue 8/EIP5: (Discussion in Skype chat) Concern that return value is unbound/non-determinism

meta-discussion point, push to EIP repo or file issues (how to determine EIP#): No objections to Issue# becoming the EIP#.

Agreed: file EIPs by filing issues, the issue number is the EIP number

Agreed: that EIP 90 was more of a "problem" than a "proposal", and anyone interested should create an EIP and we'll discuss it in the future

Agreed: that we are not in sufficient agreement on EIP-5/issue 8 to ratify an EIP now, so we classify it as a "problem" and anyone interested should create a specific proposal and we'll discuss it in the future.

Agree on 2 and 3, set WRAPAROUND to 65536, also the contract should have solidity code (presumably instantiated at the start of METROPOLIS_FORK_BLKNUM) that includes a getter

Agree on 1, substitute 4 with a getter

Agree 5/6/7 with same namespace

Agree that I should split #86 into multiple documents (1-4, 5-7, 8-10 + 12-13, 11)

Issue 8 - focus on moving forwards at a later date - Agree on 8

Vitalik agrees to create a more detailed "rationale / use cases" section for 8

Agree #9 is a problem and gather proposals

Agree that #92 should be thought about for a week

Agree to delay #10 until the full log restructuring and remove only the medstate

Agree on a call in a week on meta-discussion, and on the 23rd on remaining protocol decisions

May 23rd deadline for proposals.

Other EIPS that people want?

EIP 86

    1. what should the wraparound size be? Agreed on 2 and 3, set WRAPAROUND to 65536
  • Agree on 1, substitute 4 with a getter
  • Agree 5/6/7 with same namespace
  • Agree that I should split #86 into multiple documents (1-4, 5-7, 8-10 + 12-13, 11)
  • Agree on 8// agree to create a more detailed "rationale / use cases" section for 8
    1. change sha3(sender + sha3(code))
  • Agree to delay #10 until the full log restructuring and remove only the medstate