Disable EIP-98 transition by default

[sorpaas]

This PR replaces the default value of eip98Transition to BlockNumber::max_value, to reduce the chance of chain mis-configs. Note that:

• If a chain has EIP-658 enabled at any point, then it "disables" EIP-98. So we don't need to specify them in poacore and poasokol.
• This leaves only Kovan configs need to be changed.
• Removing existing "eip98Transition": "0xffffffffffffffff" is entirely optional.

For release note, we need to specify that:

For custom chain config, if you don't have eip98Transition specifically set, and you don't have eip658Transition enabled at block 0, then you need to add "eip98Transition": 0.

[cheme]

LGTM. Indeed release note is very important, maybe a [Breaking change] tag or any kind of emphasis should be added in the release to make it super explicit.

[stone212]

@sorpaas

@5chdn Can you please help explain the language used here:

If a chain has EIP-658 enabled at any point, then it "disables" EIP-98. So we don't need to specify them in poacore and poasokol.

The phrase "we don't need to specify them in poacore and poasokol" is confusing for a few reasons.

1. "don't need to" or must not?

2. is this only for PoA chains? If I have a private blockchain with PoW and EIP-658, is it necessary to add eip98transition? I just do not understand the language of this release note.

[jam10o-new]

@stone212 the two eips are mutually exclusive - they should never both be enabled on the same chain - there is no special case for Aura.

[stone212]

@joshua-mir Okay so if I have eip658Transition (and I do) in my chain spec, I should not have eip98transition (and I do not) correct?

Because eip98transition is dis-abled by default after 2.3.0 so eip658Transition should be happy on a chain running Parity 2.3.x with no mention for eip98transition. Do I understand this?

[stone212]

@joshua-mir

there is no special case for Aura.

What is this "Aura" you keep talking about? I do not know what this is.

[jam10o-new]

Aura is our PoA consensus engine.

Because eip98transition is dis-abled by default after 2.3.0 so eip658Transition should be happy on a chain running Parity 2.3.x. Do I understand this?

Correct.

[stone212]

@joshua-mir

Aura is our PoA consensus engine.

Okay but now this goes back in a circle to my earlier question, the vague language. The release notes above make it seem like this issue only applies to PoA. So let me ask again and mention PoW again:

Because eip98transition is dis-abled by default after 2.3.0 so eip658Transition should be happy on a chain running Parity 2.3.x and using PoW / ethash. Do I continue to understand this?

Original question: If I have a private blockchain with PoW and EIP-658, is it necessary to add eip98transition

[jam10o-new]

Yes, you're not misunderstanding anything.

The reason why there are no PoW networks mentioned in the comments above is because very few people run private PoW networks. Unless a param is in the params section within the engine section of your config, it is unrelated to the consensus engine of your chain.

[stone212]

@joshua-mir

Yes, you're not misunderstanding anything.

I am getting confused by the language. Please, a yes or no:

If I have a private blockchain with PoW and EIP-658 (at a block that is past but is not block 0), is it necessary to add eip98transition at 0 to enable sync with Parity 2.4.x?

The confusion comes from this phrase from above:

For custom chain config, if you don't have eip98Transition specifically set, and you don't have eip658Transition enabled at block 0, then you need to add "eip98Transition": 0.

We have a chain with "eip658Transition": "352300", and that means we "don't have eip658Transition enabled at block 0" so that implies we must " add "eip98Transition": 0."

Do you see why I'm confused?

This is an old issue for us, but we have not had workers since September so I am returning to it now.

And a follow-up question, is if not doing this could cause pre-2.4 versions to not sync with 2.4.x? Thank you.