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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Update fip-0077.md specification #963

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Update fip-0077.md specification #963

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
14 changes: 9 additions & 5 deletions FIPS/fip-0077.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -45,11 +45,15 @@ Furthermore, allowing network participants to cheaply and easily create numerous

## Specification

In creating a new Miner actor,

- Currently: there is no cost associated with creating new miner actors other than the gas cost for the CreateMiner message, so users spam many new miner actors without limit
- Proposed:
Require transfer a certain amount of money to the miner's account as locked reward, and the amount of this money depends on the pledge required to reach the network's block production threshold.
To combat spamming, a deposit reflecting the opportunity cost is proposed for each new miner creation, detailed as follows:
### Deposit Amount Calculation:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
### Deposit Amount Calculation:
### Deposit Amount Calculation

The deposit amount will be based on a waterline storage deposit of 10t, defined in the MINIMUM_CONSENSUS_POWER constant.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
The deposit amount will be based on a waterline storage deposit of 10t, defined in the MINIMUM_CONSENSUS_POWER constant.
The deposit amount will be based on a waterline storage deposit of 10TiB, defined in the MINIMUM_CONSENSUS_POWER constant.

This base amount will be multiplied by the sealing cost pledge, approximately 5.5 FIL/t as of 3/16/2024, as determined by StateMinerInitialPledgeCollateral. This reflects the economic conditions of the network.
Comment on lines +50 to +51
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
The deposit amount will be based on a waterline storage deposit of 10t, defined in the MINIMUM_CONSENSUS_POWER constant.
This base amount will be multiplied by the sealing cost pledge, approximately 5.5 FIL/t as of 3/16/2024, as determined by StateMinerInitialPledgeCollateral. This reflects the economic conditions of the network.
The deposit amount will be based on a waterline storage deposit of 10 TiB, defined in the MINIMUM_CONSENSUS_POWER constant.
This base amount will be multiplied by the sealing cost pledge, approximately 5.5 FIL/TiB as of 3/16/2024, as determined by StateMinerInitialPledgeCollateral. This reflects the economic conditions of the network.

I suppose this is what you meant

Comment on lines +50 to +51
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the final formula just MINIMUM_CONSENSUS_POWER x StateMinerInitialPledgeCollateral? If so, that should be clearly written as the text can be interpreted in different ways.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
This base amount will be multiplied by the sealing cost pledge, approximately 5.5 FIL/t as of 3/16/2024, as determined by StateMinerInitialPledgeCollateral. This reflects the economic conditions of the network.
This base amount will be multiplied by the Initial Pledge, approximately 5.5 FIL/TiB as of 3/16/2024, as determined by StateMinerInitialPledgeCollateral. This reflects the economic conditions of the network.

### Vesting Schedule:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
### Vesting Schedule:
### Vesting Schedule

Deposited funds will be locked as rewards for 180 days, representing the opportunity cost and ensuring funds are temporarily inaccessible.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Deposited funds will be locked as rewards for 180 days, representing the opportunity cost and ensuring funds are temporarily inaccessible.
Deposited funds will be locked 180 days, similar to a portion of block rewards are locked for 180 days before they are released to SP, representing the opportunity cost and ensuring funds are temporarily inaccessible.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maybe we shouly released to miner

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Exactly 180 days as a cliff, or a ramped release? Is the proposal to use the existing vesting table data structure for this? That would be fine, but needs to be stated.

### Handling Deposit Discrepancies:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
### Handling Deposit Discrepancies:
### Handling Deposit Discrepancies

If the deposit is insufficient, the user will be notified of the exact amount required to proceed.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems like a client implementation detail. For this spec, maybe consider to rephrase this as "Miner actor creation will fail if user fail to provide sufficient deposit."

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jennijuju thank you for your suggestion. I will modify the statement to reflect that miner actor creation will fail due to insufficient deposit, and I will also include details about the exact deposit amount required. This adjustment aims to address concerns regarding variable deposit amounts.

Surplus deposits will be refunded to the Storage Provider's (SP) balance, ensuring only the necessary funds are locked.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Surplus deposits will be refunded to the Storage Provider's (SP) balance, ensuring only the necessary funds are locked.
Surplus deposits will be added to the Storage Provider's (SP) available balance, ensuring only the necessary funds are locked.


## Design Rationale

Expand Down