Skip to content
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

Execution Layer Meeting 155 #720

Closed
timbeiko opened this issue Feb 8, 2023 · 8 comments
Closed

Execution Layer Meeting 155 #720

timbeiko opened this issue Feb 8, 2023 · 8 comments

Comments

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator

timbeiko commented Feb 8, 2023

Meeting Info

Agenda

@etan-status
Copy link

etan-status commented Feb 8, 2023

For Cancun: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-6465 (separate from 6404 transactions/receipts)

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

timbeiko commented Feb 8, 2023

@etan-status should we also add this to the SSZ breakout?

@etan-status
Copy link

Vitalik's post and EIP-6404 should be enough for the SSZ breakout. The primary discussion point to address is about the ossification of common transaction fields vs the unrestricted Union/Onion. For all other SSZ aspects, the current infrastructure (Ethereum Magicians threads and Discord) should be sufficient.

Have split EIP-6466 (Receipts) and EIP-6465 (Withdrawals) from EIP-6404, and will update them according to the SSZ breakout discussion as well.

For the next ACDE (this GH issue), EIP-6465 should be discussed for inclusion in Cancun. Execution clients will require SSZ support for EIP-4844 anyway, so Cancun seems to be a good target to get withdrawals migrated.

@wslyvh
Copy link
Member

wslyvh commented Feb 15, 2023

I'd like a few minutes to discuss and get feedback on this PR to standardize the txpool API
ethereum/execution-apis#353

@tersec
Copy link

tersec commented Feb 15, 2023

Would like to discuss the upcoming status of the minimal preset on the execution layer, since https://github.com/ethereum/execution-apis/blob/main/src/engine/experimental/blob-extension.md#blobsbundlev1 means that now the EL needs to care in some way via the engine API.

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@wslyvh @tersec added 👍

@jwasinger
Copy link

We also discussed selfdestruct removal on the call.

@timbeiko
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closed in favour of #729

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants