Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 18, 2021. It is now read-only.

Eth2.0 Implementers Call 14 Agenda #33

Closed
djrtwo opened this issue Mar 11, 2019 · 11 comments
Closed

Eth2.0 Implementers Call 14 Agenda #33

djrtwo opened this issue Mar 11, 2019 · 11 comments

Comments

@djrtwo
Copy link
Collaborator

djrtwo commented Mar 11, 2019

Eth2.0 Implementers Call 14 Agenda

Meeting Date/Time: Thursday 2019/3/14 at 14:00 GMT

Meeting Duration 1.5 hours

YouTube Live Stream Link

Agenda

  1. Testing Updates
  2. Client Updates
  3. Research Updates
  4. quick update from raul/protocol labs
  5. lighthouse benchmarks update
  6. Leap seconds and time drift
  7. Network spec
  8. Quic(k) update
  9. shuffling swap semantics
  10. serialization benchmarks
  11. Spec discussion
  12. Open Discussion/Closing Remarks
@jrhea
Copy link
Contributor

jrhea commented Mar 12, 2019

I watched Justin's talk at EthCC and he mentioned that slots will account for leap seconds. Can we talk about the reason why this is necessary? Also, I'd like to hear what other people think about the potential problem with time drift and if we plan on using some sort of method for time sync.

@zscole
Copy link
Contributor

zscole commented Mar 12, 2019

I watched Justin's talk at EthCC and he mentioned that slots will account for leap seconds. Can we talk about the reason why this is necessary? Also, I'd like to hear what other people think about the potential problem with time drift and if we plan on using some sort of method for time sync.

Yes, I have opinions.

I would also like to discuss the need for TLS support in the wire protocol. I don't think this is necessary and would only incur additional overhead.

@Mikerah
Copy link

Mikerah commented Mar 12, 2019

Can we let the Pegasys team go into details about their results on using QUIC for handel? They posted a summary in this issue and I think it can help in informing us in which transports to support/use.

@bkolad
Copy link

bkolad commented Mar 13, 2019

@Mikerah thanks for bringing it, sure we can give an update about our experience with QUIC.

@nkeywal
Copy link

nkeywal commented Mar 13, 2019

Can we let the Pegasys team go into details about their results on using QUIC for handel? They posted a summary in this issue and I think it can help in informing us in which transports to support/use.

We're more than happy to do a quic(k) update during the call :-)

@protolambda
Copy link

ethereum/consensus-specs#774
(TLDR: spec defines shuffling as a way to retrieve the right validators by querying for a sequential subset of the output, i.e. a committee. This is technically un-shuffling. Shuffling here is technically only really used in implementation to get the new list permutation from the old list permutation)

Discussion about semantics of shuffling, short read, just something to agree on. Would like to discuss this in the call. Vitalik also mentioned another related issue: ethereum/consensus-specs#729
(TLDR: in phase 1 we introduce a "shard" param to get a specific committee, which is also really just a sequential subset of the shuffled list.

@paulhauner
Copy link
Contributor

I have been bench-marking per-block/state processing across different hardware (my laptop and desktop) with different validator counts and scenarios (full block, not-so-full block).

I don't have a whole lot to say that isn't in the doc (apart from that I am sick of markdown tables). Happy to field questions or feedback though :)

https://github.com/sigp/serenity-benches

@leobago
Copy link

leobago commented Mar 14, 2019

I have been bench-marking per-block/state processing across different hardware (my laptop and desktop) with different validator counts and scenarios (full block, not-so-full block).

I don't have a whole lot to say that isn't in the doc (apart from that I am sick of markdown tables). Happy to field questions or feedback though :)

https://github.com/sigp/serenity-benches

It seems the links to the source codes are not working.

@paulhauner
Copy link
Contributor

paulhauner commented Mar 14, 2019

It seems the links to the source codes are not working.

Thanks for the heads up!

I've pulled them out for now. You can find the source here: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/tree/master/eth2/state_processing/src :)

Most optimized is here: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/tree/sane-case/eth2/state_processing/src

@djrtwo
Copy link
Collaborator Author

djrtwo commented Mar 14, 2019

Quick update from Raul from Protocol Labs:

We’re working to add deprecation notices to the areas of the spec that are outdated.
Making significant strides with https://docs.libp2p.io
Writing a non-normative walkthrough of the libp2p stack that everybody can use as a reference
Engaging in various debates on GitHub

@zscole
Copy link
Contributor

zscole commented Mar 14, 2019

@djrtwo djrtwo closed this as completed Mar 28, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

9 participants