Support PoA ACP99 + Externals EVM signatures for validator setup txs #2650

felipemadero · 2025-03-01T19:05:22Z

Why this should be merged

ACP99 is needed soon. This adds support for ACP99 PoA while keeping support for v1.0.0
There are users which have external signature processes for evm txs. Eg mutlisig.
The PR enable dumping the txs so can be separately signed, for adding , removing, and changing
weight.

How this works

How this was tested

How is this documented

friskyfoxdk · 2025-03-01T20:31:58Z

Excited about this! Going to be testing it today

friskyfoxdk · 2025-03-02T04:05:42Z

Was able to successfully get a changeWeight end to end adjustment completed today using this feature. Much appreciated!

I'll try adding a validator (and removing one too probably) on Monday.

The main tweak that would be helpful for us is if the complete step could be automatically called using a stored-key, rather than outputting the call data and access list. since those methods are not onlyOwner, anyone (including stored-keys) should be able to call them, saving us a manual step :)

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T22:04:28Z

cmd/blockchaincmd/convert.go

@@ -403,6 +410,7 @@ func InitializeValidatorManager(
 			aggregatorAllowPrivatePeers,
 			aggregatorLogger,
 			validatorManagerAddrStr,
+			useACP99,


With ACP 99, we no longer have to differentiate initializing validator manager for poa and pos. We can just initialize validator manager and if user wants to do pos, we can do additional steps after.

Example implementation:

avalanche-cli/cmd/blockchaincmd/convert.go

Line 374 in f0a6d96

// both POA and POS have to do this step first now

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T22:06:35Z

pkg/validatormanager/validatormanager.go

@@ -186,6 +216,7 @@ func SetupPoA(
 	aggregatorAllowPrivatePeers bool,
 	aggregatorLogger logging.Logger,
 	validatorManagerAddressStr string,
+	useACP99 bool,
 ) error {
 	return subnet.InitializeProofOfAuthority(


doesn't have to be InitializeProofOfAuthority anymore. Can just be initialize validator manager

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T22:11:00Z

Don't think we need to support both ACP 99 and validator manager 1.0.0 contracts. Supporting both adds additional complexity esp to our sdk. Plus once ACP 99 is released, don't think there's a need for users to use validator manager 1.0.0 contracts. Deferring to @learyce

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T22:37:08Z

cmd/blockchaincmd/add_validator.go

 	cmd.Flags().Uint64Var(&weight, validatorWeightFlag, uint64(constants.DefaultStakeWeight), "set the weight of the validator")
+	cmd.Flags().StringVar(&validatorManagerOwner, "validator-manager-owner", "", "force using this address to issue transactions to the validator manager")


we technically dont even need to get validator manager using flag anymore. Currently we only get validator manager from on chain if user doesn't provide argument to add validator. But I think its better if we just do this for all cases -> meaning even if user provides argument to add validator. This means that we don't even need validator-manager-owner flag anymore in add_validator, same goes for remove_validator and change_weight

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T22:38:14Z

cmd/blockchaincmd/remove_validator.go

@@ -66,6 +66,8 @@ these prompts by providing the values with flags.`,
 	cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&aggregatorLogToStdout, "aggregator-log-to-stdout", false, "use stdout for signature aggregator logs")
 	cmd.Flags().Uint64Var(&uptimeSec, "uptime", 0, "validator's uptime in seconds. If not provided, it will be automatically calculated")
 	cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&force, "force", false, "force validator removal even if it's not getting rewarded")
+	cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&externalValidatorManagerOwner, "external-validator-manager-owner", false, "validator manager owner is external, make hex dump of ech evm transactions, so they can be signed in a separate flow")
+	cmd.Flags().StringVar(&validatorManagerOwner, "validator-manager-owner", "", "force using this address to issue transactions to the validator manager")


same comment here, dont think we need validator manager flag anymore, like in add_validator

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T22:38:47Z

cmd/blockchaincmd/change_weight.go

@@ -47,6 +59,14 @@ The L1 has to be a Proof of Authority L1.`,
 	cmd.Flags().StringVar(&nodeEndpoint, "node-endpoint", "", "gather node id/bls from publicly available avalanchego apis on the given endpoint")
 	cmd.Flags().BoolVarP(&useLedger, "ledger", "g", false, "use ledger instead of key (always true on mainnet, defaults to false on fuji/devnet)")
 	cmd.Flags().StringSliceVar(&ledgerAddresses, "ledger-addrs", []string{}, "use the given ledger addresses")
+	cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&externalValidatorManagerOwner, "external-validator-manager-owner", false, "validator manager owner is external, make hex dump of ech evm transactions, so they can be signed in a separate flow")
+	cmd.Flags().StringVar(&validatorManagerOwner, "validator-manager-owner", "", "force using this address to issue transactions to the validator manager")


same comment on no need for validator-manager-owner flag like in add_validator

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T23:11:39Z

pkg/contract/contract.go

+	var txOpts *bind.TransactOpts
+	if generateRawTxOnly {
+		txOpts = &bind.TransactOpts{
+			From:   from,
+			Signer: idempotentSigner,
+			NoSend: true,
+		}
+	} else {
+		txOpts, err = evm.GetTxOptsWithSigner(client, privateKey)
+		if err != nil {
+			return nil, nil, err
+		}


sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T23:18:42Z

sdk/validatormanager/validator_manager_poa.go

@@ -23,25 +23,46 @@ func PoAValidatorManagerInitialize(
 	privateKey string,
 	subnetID ids.ID,
 	ownerAddress common.Address,
+	useACP99 bool,


We don't have to differentiate PoAValidatorManagerInitialize and PoSValidatorManagerInitialize anymore. We can just have one function InitializeValidatorManager and have it in root.go / some common file

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-03T23:23:40Z

pkg/vm/create_evm.go

-		validatormanager.AddValidatorMessagesContractToAllocations(params.initialTokenAllocation)
-		validatormanager.AddPoAValidatorManagerContractToAllocations(params.initialTokenAllocation)
+		if useACP99 {
+			validatormanager.AddValidatorMessagesACP99ContractToAllocations(params.initialTokenAllocation)


deployedValidatorMessagesACP99Bytecode has the same value as validator manager 1.0.0 btw

so can just reuse AddValidatorMessagesContractToAllocations

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-04T00:05:37Z

pkg/evm/evm.go

+	if from == (common.Address{}) {
+		from = crypto.PubkeyToAddress(privateKey.PublicKey)
+	}
+	gasFeeCap, gasTipCap, nonce, err := CalculateTxParams(client, from.Hex())


I don't foresee from being an empty address, especially if we are getting "validator manager owner" address on chain anyways. This means that we don't need from in argument and we can just use crypto.PubkeyToAddress(privateKey.PublicKey)

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-04T00:14:57Z

pkg/contract/contract.go

+func idempotentSigner(
+	_ common.Address,
+	tx *types.Transaction,
+) (*types.Transaction, error) {
+	return tx, nil
+}
+


why dont we name this emptySigner

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-04T00:19:54Z

pkg/evm/evm.go

+	if privateKeyStr != "" {
+		privateKey, err = crypto.HexToECDSA(privateKeyStr)
+		if err != nil {
+			return nil, err
+		}
 	}
-	address := crypto.PubkeyToAddress(privateKey.PublicKey)
-	gasFeeCap, gasTipCap, nonce, err := CalculateTxParams(client, address.Hex())
+	if from == (common.Address{}) {
+		from = crypto.PubkeyToAddress(privateKey.PublicKey)
+	}


Seems that either privateKeyStr == "" or from == "", maybe we can just do if else here to prevent unintended overriding of from values

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-04T00:20:53Z

pkg/evm/evm.go

 	client ethclient.Client,
+	generateRawTxOnly bool,
+	from common.Address,
 	privateKeyStr string,
 	warpMessage *avalancheWarp.Message,
 	contract common.Address,
 	callData []byte,
 	value *big.Int,
 ) (*types.Transaction, error) {
 	const defaultGasLimit = 2_000_000


should we add a check here where either privateKeyStr != "" or from != "" and both can't be empty and both can't be not empty also?

same for txtomethod

sukantoraymond · 2025-03-04T00:31:36Z

cmd/blockchaincmd/add_validator.go

 	cmd.Flags().Uint64Var(&weight, validatorWeightFlag, uint64(constants.DefaultStakeWeight), "set the weight of the validator")
+	cmd.Flags().StringVar(&validatorManagerOwner, "validator-manager-owner", "", "force using this address to issue transactions to the validator manager")
+	cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&externalValidatorManagerOwner, "external-validator-manager-owner", false, "validator manager owner is external, make hex dump of ech evm transactions, so they can be signed in a separate flow")


unclear what external-validator-manager-owner means, I think we can just rename this to generate-raw-tx-only, with desc as "set this value to true when signing validator manager tx outside of cli" or sth similar

or i think sign-externally ?

and say in description for multisig or ledger

felipemadero added 3 commits February 28, 2025 11:37

add options to TxToMethod to just generate raw tx

6df6a16

add evm multisig feature

6904684

poa acp99 + external evm signature support

7b017c9

felipemadero requested a review from a team as a code owner March 1, 2025 19:05

felipemadero requested review from sukantoraymond, meaghanfitzgerald and cwend-ava March 1, 2025 19:05

github-actions bot assigned felipemadero Mar 1, 2025

felipemadero added 5 commits March 1, 2025 16:10

fix

72cdb89

empty

bb529dd

update e2e genesis

b7da868

fix removal for pos (not ACP99 yet)

bb1beb5

fix e2e

40ff358

felipemadero added 4 commits March 1, 2025 18:34

fix weight allows

242e2ce

nit

2e2792a

nit

df36580

improve dumps

0b9553f

felipemadero added 2 commits March 2, 2025 10:07

add flag to use another validator manager owner

a3c9f08

add initiate-tx-hash flag to change weight

76776e3

sukantoraymond reviewed Mar 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

remove fmt print

d619ad2

sukantoraymond reviewed Mar 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

sukantoraymond reviewed Mar 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

no op

f31af89

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Support PoA ACP99 + Externals EVM signatures for validator setup txs #2650

Support PoA ACP99 + Externals EVM signatures for validator setup txs #2650

felipemadero commented Mar 1, 2025

friskyfoxdk commented Mar 1, 2025

friskyfoxdk commented Mar 2, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

sukantoraymond commented Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 4, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 4, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 4, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 4, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 4, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 4, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 7, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 7, 2025

		cmd.Flags().Uint64Var(&weight, validatorWeightFlag, uint64(constants.DefaultStakeWeight), "set the weight of the validator")
		cmd.Flags().StringVar(&validatorManagerOwner, "validator-manager-owner", "", "force using this address to issue transactions to the validator manager")

Support PoA ACP99 + Externals EVM signatures for validator setup txs #2650

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Support PoA ACP99 + Externals EVM signatures for validator setup txs #2650

Conversation

felipemadero commented Mar 1, 2025

Why this should be merged

How this works

How this was tested

How is this documented

friskyfoxdk commented Mar 1, 2025

friskyfoxdk commented Mar 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sukantoraymond commented Mar 3, 2025

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

sukantoraymond Mar 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading