documentation: add BEEFY 'spec'

client/beefy/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,373 @@
+# BEEFY
+**BEEFY** (**B**ridge **E**fficiency **E**nabling **F**inality **Y**ielder) is a secondary
+protocol running along GRANDPA Finality to support efficient bridging with non-Substrate
+blockchains, currently mainly ETH mainnet.
+
+It can be thought of as an (optional) Bridge-specific Gadget to the GRANDPA Finality protocol.
+The Protocol piggybacks on many assumptions provided by GRANDPA, and is required to be built
+on top of it to work correctly.
+
+BEEFY is a consensus protocol designed with efficient trustless bridging in mind. It means
+that building a light client of BEEFY protocol should be optimized for restricted environments
+like Ethereum Smart Contracts or On-Chain State Transition Function (e.g. Substrate Runtime).
+Note that BEEFY is not a standalone protocol, it is meant to be running alongside GRANDPA, a
+finality gadget created for Substrate/Polkadot ecosystem. More details about GRANDPA can be found
+in the [whitepaper](https://github.com/w3f/consensus/blob/master/pdf/grandpa.pdf).
+
+# Context
+
+## Bridges
+
+We want to be able "bridge" different blockchains. We do so by safely sharing and verifying
+information about each chain’s state, i.e. blockchain A should be able to verify that blockchain
+`B` is at block #X.
+
+## Finality
+
+Finality in blockchains is a concept that means that after a given block #X has been finalized,
+it will never be reverted (e.g. due to a re-org). As such, we can be assured that any transaction
+that exists in this block will never be reverted.
+
+## GRANDPA
+
+GRANDPA is our finality gadget. It allows a set of nodes to come to BFT agreement on what is the
+canonical chain. It requires that 2/3 of the validator set agrees on a prefix of the canonical
+chain, which then becomes finalized.
+
+![img](https://miro.medium.com/max/955/1*NTg26i4xbO3JncF_Usu9MA.png)
+
+### Difficulties of GRANDPA finality proofs
+
+```rust
+struct Justification<Block: BlockT> {
+    round: u64,
+    commit: Commit<Block>,
+    votes_ancestries: Vec<Block::Header>,
+}
+
+struct Commit<Hash, Number, Signature, Id> {
+    target_hash: Hash,
+    target_number: Number,
+    precommits: Vec<SignedPrecommit<Hash, Number, Signature, Id>>,
+}
+
+struct SignedPrecommit<Hash, Number, Signature, Id> {
+    precommit: Precommit<Hash, Number>,
+    signature: Signature,
+    id: Id,
+}
+
+struct Precommit<Hash, Number> {
+    target_hash: Hash,
+    target_number: Number,
+}
+```
+
+The main difficulty of verifying GRANDPA finality proofs comes from the fact that voters are
+voting on different things. In GRANDPA each voter will vote for the block they think is the
+latest one, and the protocol will come to agreement on what is the common ancestor which has >
+2/3 support.
+
+This creates two sets of inefficiencies:
+
+- We may need to have each validator's vote data because they're all potentially different (i.e.
+  just the signature isn't enough).
+- We may need to attach a couple of headers to the finality proof in order to be able to verify
+  all of the votes' ancestries.
+
+Additionally, since our interim goal is to bridge to Ethereum there is also a difficulty related
+to "incompatible" crypto schemes. We use \`ed25519\` signatures in GRANDPA which we can't
+efficiently verify in the EVM.
+
+Hence,
+
+### Goals of BEEFY
+
+1. Allow customisation of crypto to adapt for different targets. Support thresholds signatures as
+   well eventually.
+1. Minimize the size of the "signed payload" and the finality proof.
+1. Unify data types and use backward-compatible versioning so that the protocol can be extended
+   (additional payload, different crypto) without breaking existing light clients.
+
+And since BEEFY is required to be running on top of GRANDPA. This allows us to take couple of
+shortcuts:
+1. BEEFY validator set is **the same** as GRANDPA's (i.e. the same bonded actors), they might be
+   identified by different session keys though.
+1. BEEFY runs on **finalized** canonical chain, i.e. no forks (note Misbehavior
+   section though).
+1. From a single validator perspective, BEEFY has at most one active voting round. Since GRANDPA
+   validators are reaching finality, we assume they are on-line and well-connected and have
+   similar view of the state of the blockchain.
+
+# The BEEFY Protocol
+
+## Mental Model
+
+BEEFY should be considered as an extra voting round done by GRANDPA validators for the current
+best finalized block. Similarily to how GRANDPA is lagging behind best produced (non-finalized)
+block, BEEFY is going to lag behind best GRANDPA (finalized) block.
+
+```
+                       ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐ ┌──────┐
+                       │      │ │      │ │      │ │      │ │      │
+                       │  B1  │ │  B2  │ │  B3  │ │  B4  │ │  B5  │
+                       │      │ │      │ │      │ │      │ │      │
+                       └──────┘ └───▲──┘ └──────┘ └───▲──┘ └───▲──┘
+                                    │                 │        │
+     Best BEEFY block───────────────┘                 │        │
+                                                      │        │
+     Best GRANDPA block───────────────────────────────┘        │
+                                                               │
+     Best produced block───────────────────────────────────────┘
+
+```
+
+A pseudo-algorithm of behaviour for a fully-synced BEEFY validator is:
+
+```
+loop {
+  let (best_beefy, best_grandpa) = wait_for_best_blocks();
+
+  let block_to_vote_on = choose_next_beefy_block(
+    best_beefy,
+    best_grandpa
+  );
+
+  let payload_to_vote_on = retrieve_payload(block_to_vote_on);
+
+  let commitment = (block_to_vote_on, payload_to_vote_on);
+
+  let signature = sign_with_current_session_key(commitment);
+
+  broadcast_vote(commitment, signature);
+}
+```
+
+## Details
+
+Before we jump into describing how BEEFY works in details, let's agree on the terms we are going
+to use and actors in the system. All nodes in the network need to participate in the BEEFY
+networking protocol, but we can identify two distinct actors though: **regular nodes** and
+**BEEFY validators**.
+Validators are expected to actively participate in the protocol, by producing and broadcasting
+**votes**. Votes are simply their signatures over a **Commitment**. A Commitment consists of a
+**payload** (an opaque blob of bytes extracted from a block or state at that block, expected to
+be some form of crypto accumulator (like Merkle Tree Hash or Merkle Mountain Range Root Hash))
+and **block number** from which this payload originates. Additionally, Commitment contains BEEFY
+**validator set id** at that particular block. Note the block is finalized, so there is no
+ambiguity despite using block number instead of a hash. A collection of **votes**, or rather
+a Commitment and a collection of signatures is going to be called **Signed Commitment**. A valid
+(see later for the rules) Signed Commitment is also called a **BEEFY Justification** or
+**BEEFY Finality Proof**. For more details on the actual data structures please see
+[BEEFY primitives definitions](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/tree/master/primitives/beefy/src).
+
+A **round** is an attempt by BEEFY validators to produce a BEEFY Justification. **Round number**
+is simply defined as a block number the validators are voting for, or to be more precise, the
+Commitment for that block number. Round ends when the next round is started, which may happen
+when one of the events occur:
+1. Either the node collects `2/3rd + 1` valid votes for that round.
+2. Or the node receives a BEEFY Justification for a block greater than the current best BEEFY block.
+
+In both cases the node proceeds to determining the new round number using "Round Selection"
+procedure.
+
+Regular nodes are expected to:
+1. Receive & validate votes for the current round and broadcast them to their peers.
+1. Receive & validate BEEFY Justifications and broadcast them to their peers.
+1. Return BEEFY Justifications for **Mandatory Blocks** on demand.
+1. Optionally return BEEFY Justifications for non-mandatory blocks on demand.
+
+Validators are expected to additionally:
+1. Produce & broadcast vote for the current round.
+
+Both kinds of actors are expected to fully participate in the protocol ONLY IF they believe they
+are up-to-date with the rest of the network, i.e. they are fully synced. Before this happens,
+the node should continue processing imported BEEFY Justifications and votes without actively
+voting themselves.
+
+### Round Selection
+
+Every node (both regular nodes and validators) need to determine locally what they believe
+current round number is. The choice is based on their knowledge of:
+
+1. Best GRANDPA finalized block number (`best_grandpa`).
+1. Best BEEFY finalized block number (`best_beefy`).
+1. Starting block of current session (`session_start`).
+
+**Session** means a period of time (or rather number of blocks) where validator set (keys) do not change.
+See `pallet_session` for implementation details in `FRAME` context. Since we piggy-back on
+GRANDPA, session boundaries for BEEFY are exactly the same as the ones for GRANDPA.
+
+We define two kinds of blocks from the perspective of BEEFY protocol:
+1. **Mandatory Blocks**
+2. **Non-mandatory Blocks**
+
+Mandatory blocks are the ones that MUST have BEEFY justification. That means that the validators
+will always start and conclude a round at mandatory blocks. For non-mandatory blocks, there may
+or may not be a justification and validators may never choose these blocks to start a round.
+
+Every **first block in** each **session** is considered a **mandatory block**. All other blocks
+in the session are non-mandatory, however validators are encouraged to finalize as many blocks as
+possible to enable lower latency for light clients and hence end users. Since GRANDPA is
+considering session boundary blocks as mandatory as well, `session_start` block will always have
+both GRANDPA and BEEFY Justification.
+
+Therefore, to determine current round number nodes use a formula:
+
+```
+round_number =
+      (1 - M) * session_start
+   +        M * (best_beefy + NEXT_POWER_OF_TWO((best_grandpa - best_beefy + 1) / 2))
+```
+
+where:
+
+- `M` is `1` if mandatory block in current session is already finalized and `0` otherwise.
+- `NEXT_POWER_OF_TWO(x)` returns the smallest number greater or equal to `x` that is a power of two.
+
+In other words, the next round number should be the oldest mandatory block without a justification,
+or the highest GRANDPA-finalized block, whose block number difference with `best_beefy` block is
+a power of two. The mental model for round selection is to first finalize the mandatory block and
+then to attempt to pick a block taking into account how fast BEEFY catches up with GRANDPA.
+In case GRANDPA makes progress, but BEEFY seems to be lagging behind, validators are changing
+rounds less often to increase the chance of concluding them.
+
+As mentioned earlier, every time the node picks a new `round_number` (and validator casts a vote)
+it ends the previous one, no matter if finality was reached (i.e. the round concluded) or not.
+Votes for an inactive round should not be propagated.
+
+Note that since BEEFY only votes for GRANDPA-finalized blocks, `session_start` here actually means:
+"the latest session for which the start of is GRANDPA-finalized", i.e. block production might
+have already progressed, but BEEFY needs to first finalize the mandatory block of the older
+session.
+
+In good networking conditions BEEFY may end up finalizing each and every block (if GRANDPA does
+the same). Practically, with short block times, it's going to be rare and might be excessive, so
+it's suggested for implementations to introduce a `min_delta` parameter which will limit the
+frequency with which new rounds are started. The affected component of the formula would be:
+`best_beefy + MAX(min_delta, NEXT_POWER_OF_TWO(...))`, so we start a new round only if the
+power-of-two component is greater than the min delta. Note that if `round_number > best_grandpa`
+the validators are not expected to start any round.
+
+### Catch up
+
+Every session is guaranteed to have at least one BEEFY-finalized block. However it also means
+that the round at mandatory block must be concluded even though, a new session has already started
+(i.e. the on-chain component has selected a new validator set and GRANDPA might have already
+finalized the transition). In such case BEEFY must "catch up" the previous sessions and make sure to
+conclude rounds for mandatory blocks. Note that older sessions must obviously be finalized by the
+validator set at that point in time, not the latest/current one.
+
+### Initial Sync
+
+It's all rainbows and unicorns when the node is fully synced with the network. However during cold
+startup it will have hard time determining the current round number. Because of that nodes that
+are not fully synced should not participate in BEEFY protocol at all.
+
+During the sync we should make sure to also fetch BEEFY justifications for all mandatory blocks.
+This can happen asynchronously, but validators, before starting to vote, need to be certain
+about the last session that contains a concluded round on mandatory block in order to initiate the
+catch up procedure.
+
+### Gossip
+
+Nodes participating in BEEFY protocol are expected to gossip messages around.
+The protocol defines following messages:
+
+1. Votes for the current round,
+2. BEEFY Justifications for recently concluded rounds,
+3. BEEFY Justification for the latest mandatory block,
+
+Each message is additionally associated with a **topic**, which can be either:
+1. the round number (i.e. topic associated with a particular round),
+2. or the global topic (independent from the rounds).
+
+Round-specific topic should only be used to gossip the votes, other messages are gossiped
+periodically on the global topic. Let's now dive into description of the messages.
+
+- **Votes**
+  - Votes are sent on the round-specific topic.
+  - Vote is considered valid when:
+    - The commitment matches local commitment.
+    - The validator is part of the current validator set.
+    - The signature is correct.
+
+- **BEEFY Justification**
+  - Justifications are sent on the global topic.
+  - Justification is considered worthwhile to gossip when:
+    - It is for a recent (implementation specific) round or the latest mandatory round.
+    - All signatures are valid and there is at least `2/3rd + 1` of them.
+    - Signatorees are part of the current validator set.
+  - Mandatory justifications should be announced periodically.
+
+## Misbehavior
+
+Similarily to other PoS protocols, BEEFY considers casting two different votes in the same round a
+misbehavior. I.e. for a particular `round_number`, the validator produces signatures for 2 different
+`Commitment`s and broadcasts them. This is called **equivocation**.
+
+On top of this, voting on an incorrect **payload** is considered a misbehavior as well, and since
+we piggy-back on GRANDPA there is no ambiguity in terms of the fork validators should be voting for.
+
+Misbehavior should be penalized. If more validators misbehave in the exact same `round` the
+penalty should be more severe, up to the entire bonded stake in case we reach `1/3rd + 1`
+validators misbehaving.
+
+## Ethereum
+
+Initial version of BEEFY was made to enable efficient bridging with Ethereum, where the light
+client is a Solidity Smart Contract compiled to EVM bytecode. Hence the choice of the initial
+cryptography for BEEFY: `secp256k1` and usage of `keccak256` hashing function.
+
+### Future: Supporting multiple crypto
+
+While BEEFY currently works with `secp256k1` signatures, we intend in the future to support
+multiple signature schemes.
+This means that multiple kinds of `SignedCommitment`s might exist and only together they form a
+full `BEEFY Justification`.
+
+## BEEFY Key
+
+The current cryptographic scheme used by BEEFY is `ecdsa`. This is **different** from other
+schemes like `sr25519` and `ed25519` which are commonly used in Substrate configurations for
+other pallets (BABE, GRANDPA, AuRa, etc). The most noticeable difference is that an `ecdsa`
+public key is `33` bytes long, instead of `32` bytes for a `sr25519` based public key. So, a
+BEEFY key [sticks out](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/blob/25951e45b1907853f120c752aaa01631a0b3e783/node/service/src/chain_spec.rs#L738)
+among the other public keys a bit.
+
+For other crypto (using the default Substrate configuration) the `AccountId` (32-bytes) matches
+the `PublicKey`, but note that it's not the case for BEEFY. As a consequence of this, you can
+**not** convert the `AccountId` raw bytes into a BEEFY `PublicKey`.
+
+The easiest way to generate or view hex-encoded or SS58-encoded BEEFY Public Key is by using the
+[Subkey](https://substrate.dev/docs/en/knowledgebase/integrate/subkey) tool. Generate a BEEFY key
+using the following command
+
+```sh
+subkey generate --scheme ecdsa
+```
+
+The output will look something like
+
+```sh
+Secret phrase `sunset anxiety liberty mention dwarf actress advice stove peasant olive kite rebuild` is account:
+  Secret seed:       0x9f844e21444683c8fcf558c4c11231a14ed9dea6f09a8cc505604368ef204a61
+  Public key (hex):  0x02d69740c3bbfbdbb365886c8270c4aafd17cbffb2e04ecef581e6dced5aded2cd
+  Public key (SS58): KW7n1vMENCBLQpbT5FWtmYWHNvEyGjSrNL4JE32mDds3xnXTf
+  Account ID:        0x295509ae9a9b04ade5f1756b5f58f4161cf57037b4543eac37b3b555644f6aed
+  SS58 Address:      5Czu5hudL79ETnQt6GAkVJHGhDQ6Qv3VWq54zN1CPKzKzYGu
+
+```
+
+In case your BEEFY keys are using the wrong cryptographic scheme, you will see an invalid public
+key format message at node startup. Basically something like
+
+```sh
+...
+2021-05-28 12:37:51  [Relaychain] Invalid BEEFY PublicKey format!
+...
+```
+
+# BEEFY Light Client
+
+TODO