-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add EIP: Theorem-Carrying-Transaction - TCT #7837
Conversation
File
|
Co-authored-by: Andrew B Coathup <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Once you move the file, the bot will start complaining. You'll need to fix the errors it reports too.
The commit 97abc93 (as a parent of 4d11954) contains errors. |
Technically, code path hash $\mathrm{h}$ will be added into `Transaction` struct so each transaction will carry its own hypothesis hash $\mathrm{h}$. | ||
|
||
```go | ||
// Transaction is an Ethereum transaction. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
doesn't seem to follow ethereum transaction specification
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
do you mean we modify the Transaction
struct which violates the ethereum transaction specification?
|
||
## Backwards Compatibility | ||
|
||
The primary concern lies in the potential for incompatibility, particularly with regards to the occurrence of a fork. The Theorem-Carrying-Transaction (TCT) system may reject certain transactions that violate the theorem, while the original Ethereum network may accept these transactions. This discrepancy in transaction acceptance could lead to a network fork, resulting in divergent block states. To address this issue, we propose conducting a comprehensive evaluation of TCT's effectiveness and stability by initially deploying it on a testnet such as `Goeril`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if its a new transaction type enabled at some fork i don't understand how it makes it backward incompatible
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You are right, it will be incompatible. That's why we want to use a testnet to test TCT first.
Co-authored-by: g11tech <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: g11tech <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: g11tech <[email protected]>
There has been no activity on this pull request for 2 weeks. It will be closed after 3 months of inactivity. If you would like to move this PR forward, please respond to any outstanding feedback or add a comment indicating that you have addressed all required feedback and are ready for a review. |
This pull request was closed due to inactivity. If you are still pursuing it, feel free to reopen it and respond to any feedback or request a review in a comment. |
When opening a pull request to submit a new EIP, please use the suggested template: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/eip-template.md
We have a GitHub bot that automatically merges some PRs. It will merge yours immediately if certain criteria are met: