Skip to content

CDDL #420

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 45 commits into from
Jun 23, 2025
Merged

CDDL #420

merged 45 commits into from
Jun 23, 2025
+73,950 −1,034

Conversation

will-break-it
Copy link
Contributor

@will-break-it will-break-it commented Jun 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

  • Ranking Blocks
  • Votes & Certificates
  • Endorser Blocks
  • Input Blocks
    • Common/ Base
    • Sharded
    • Over-collateralized
  • Transactions
    • Sharded
    • Over-collateralized

bwbush and others added 17 commits June 12, 2025 09:02
@bwbush
Miniature mainnet (#402)
28d2364 
* Created "mini mainnet" topology
* Updated logbook
@SupernaviX
Support configurable timestamp resolution in rust simulation (#404)
be5ed74 
* sim-rs: add config settings for timestamp resolution

* sim-rs: use u64 instead of duration in timestamp

* sim-rs: support coarse-grained timestamps in network layer

* sim-rs: support configurable timestamp resolution
@github-actions
Update formal specification documentation
e309cb7 
- Updated from ouroboros-leios-formal-spec repository
- Run ID: 15629229378
- Triggered by: repository_dispatch
@bwbush
Reduced memory footprint of leios trace processor (#407)
1dd9454 
* Reduced memory footprint of leios trace processor
* Updated logbook
@will-break-it
site: weekly update
76095cd
@olgahryniuk
Minor edits to the latest tech update (#408)
b58720a
@SupernaviX
Forgot to update logbook
f20c11d
@bwbush
Improvements to trace processor (#412)
f2ed765 
* Added ingress field to output
* Added size field to receipt output
* Reformatted Haskell
* Updated logbook
@bwbush
Pseudo-mainnet experiments at tag leios-2025w23 (#389)
12a6943 
* Designed pseudo-mainnet experiments
* Config files for bug report
* Designed IB experiment
* Case and summary files for experiments
* Data analysis for simulation experiments
* Added summary slides
* Updated logbook

---------

Co-authored-by: Brian W Bush <[email protected]>
@bwbush
Mini-mainnet experiments at tag leios-2025w24 (#403)
d9d6639 
* Mini-mainnet experiments at tag `leios-2025w24`
* Designed IBS experiments
* Executed experiments
* Data analysis of experiments
* Summary slides
* Updated logbook
@nfrisby
Add entr to nix shell (#414)
b20de35
@github-actions
Update formal specification documentation
4d2e12a 
- Updated from ouroboros-leios-formal-spec repository
- Run ID: 15728586414
- Triggered by: repository_dispatch
@SupernaviX
Add support for conflicting transactions (#415)
9af61b1 
* sim-rs: add input_id to traces

* sim-rs: include rb-ref on output

* sim-rs: do not create IBs with conflicting transactions

* sim-rs: do not add conflicting blocks to mempool

* sim-rs: support configuring tx-conflict-fraction

* sim-rs: support leios-aggressive-mempool-pruning setting

* sim-rs: fix intermittent test failure
@bwbush
Added bandwidth measurements to logbook
b5dd5b4
@will-break-it
docs: add RB cddl diffs
9a07b89
@will-break-it
docs: add votes & certs
818e98a
@will-break-it
docs: change order
93532d8
@will-break-it will-break-it requested review from bwbush and ch1bo June 19, 2025 12:11
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@bwbush bwbush left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The RB and vote CDDLs looks good. I noted that the vote CDDL differs from an optimization that the simulators currently use. We'll have to discuss whether that optimization should be memorialized in the specification itself.

@bwbush
Copy link
Collaborator

bwbush commented Jun 19, 2025

For the IB and EB CDDL, we'll need to decide whether a node is allowed to produce multiple IBs in the same slot or multiple EBs in the same pipeline.

  • The simulations currently allow this.
  • The crypto benchmarks do not.
    We've flip-flopped on this a couple of times over the past six months.

Personally, I think the probability of being allowed multiple IBs or EBs is small enough (even for the biggest stakepools) that we should limit it to one. This simplifies the data structures, makes it easier to detect equivocation, etc.

@will-break-it
Copy link
Contributor Author

Personally, I think the probability of being allowed multiple IBs or EBs is small enough (even for the biggest stakepools) that we should limit it to one. This simplifies the data structures, makes it easier to detect equivocation, etc.

I agree. It would also simplify the network protocol presumably (by disallowing multiple announcements per slot).
I'll stick to a simple CDDL structure when I get to the point. Still looking at the base structure for EBs

will-break-it and others added 3 commits June 19, 2025 18:07
@will-break-it
docs: add endorser blocks
bd6d9bf
@will-break-it
docs: add vote bundles; add note for vote epheremal persistence;
d60b4e8
@bwbush
CIP section on metrics (#401)
8569547 
* Drafted CIP section on metrics
* Added metrics for fees
* Noted possibility of local metric for network
* Comment on tx inclusion metric
* Added note on the draft nature of the metrics
* Updated logbook
ch1bo
ch1bo approved these changes Jun 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ch1bo ch1bo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for collecting these!

Would you say we should have multiple sub-documents and put things into one md file again later?

I like that some sections have been explaining concepts next to the data structures too. Would you continue this with, for example, the network protocols to submit these data types?

kbennett2000 and others added 3 commits June 20, 2025 08:55
@kbennett2000
Doc Updates - add simple explainer (#421)
58aa97d 
* Create simple-explainer.md

* Update faq.md
@SupernaviX
Update logbook
60826b4
@bwbush
Initial draft of second technical report (#422)
fa0bc3a 
* Added network mini-protocols to second tech report
* Drafted simulation realism section of second technical report
* Removed unneeded figures
* Figures for simulation realism
* Added opaque background to figures
* Updated logbook
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
bwbush
bwbush reviewed Jun 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@bwbush bwbush left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The block CDDL looks good, but I had a couple of questions and comments.

@will-break-it will-break-it merged commit 2e4b28e into cip/review Jun 23, 2025
6 of 7 checks passed
@will-break-it will-break-it deleted the cip/cddl branch June 23, 2025 11:29
ch1bo pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2025
@will-break-it @ch1bo
CDDL (#420)
5d55a1b 
* docs(CDDL): added base definitions for blocks, votes & certificates and sharding-specific definitions
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@bwbush bwbush bwbush left review comments

@ch1bo ch1bo ch1bo approved these changes

@nfrisby nfrisby Awaiting requested review from nfrisby

@Quantumplation Quantumplation Awaiting requested review from Quantumplation

@WhatisRT WhatisRT Awaiting requested review from WhatisRT

@SupernaviX SupernaviX Awaiting requested review from SupernaviX

Assignees

@will-break-it will-break-it

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
8 participants
@will-break-it @bwbush @ch1bo @SupernaviX @olgahryniuk @nfrisby @kbennett2000 @yveshauser