fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey #3241

jetbldr · 2025-07-18T09:12:21Z

Summary

Change bid submission limit mechanism from builder address (pubkey) to builder name for more flexible configuration.

Problem

The original bid limiting mechanism was based on builder address, but in some scenarios, the same builder might use different addresses, or we want to group limits by builder name.

Solution

Extend BuilderConfig struct: Add Name field to support explicit builder name configuration
Smart name extraction: Auto-extract builder name from URL domain when Name is not configured
Update limit logic: Use builderName instead of address in bidSimulator
Backward compatibility: Maintain compatibility with existing config format

Changes

1. Config structure update

type BuilderConfig struct {
    Address common.Address
    URL     string
    Name    string `toml:",omitempty"` // Builder name, if empty will use domain suffix from URL
}

2. New methods

GetBuilderName(): Get builder name, prioritize configured Name, otherwise extract from URL
extractDomainSuffix(): Extract builder name from URL domain

3. Limit logic adjustment

bidSimulator limits by builderName instead of address
Keep existing maxBidsPerBuilder config parameter

Config example

[[builders]]
address = "0x1234567890123456789012345678901234567890"
url = "https://tokyo.builder.blockrazor.io"
name = "blockrazor"  # Optional, auto-extract from URL if not set

[[builders]]
address = "0xabcdefabcdefabcdefabcdefabcdefabcdefabcd"
url = "https://builder.flashbots.net"
# No name configured, will auto-extract as "flashbots"

Backward compatibility

✅ Existing config files work without modification
✅ Auto-extract from URL when Name field is not configured
✅ Keep existing maxBidsPerBuilder config parameter

Testing

✅ Test with configured Name field
✅ Test auto-extraction from URL
✅ Test various URL formats
✅ Test edge cases

Impact

Positive: More flexible builder grouping limit mechanism
No negative impact: Fully backward compatible

zzzckck · 2025-07-22T03:28:00Z

Currently, each builder can have at most 6 addresses, each address can bid twice for each block at most.
With this proposal, the bid limitation will be builder granularity, rather than builder-address granularity.

2 feedbacks:

1.lower the builder's bid for each block from 12(6*2) to 6? Builder should be self-constraint from sending to many bids.
2.this proposal will impact builder's bid strategy, needs to be confirmed with builders and set up a timeline for it, so builders can have enough time to migrate.

jetbldr · 2025-07-22T08:41:14Z

@zzzckck thank you for response

🔧 Assumption Behind the Proposal
With blind bidding, each builder may submit more blocks, increasing the validator's simulation load

This isn’t malicious — just rational behavior under the new rules: since builders are only competing against their own previous bids, they’ll send a new block as long as it shows any improvement.

✅ Feedback 1: Limit from 12 to 6
We’re okay with this change.
It reduces the max simulations per block from 60 to 30 — a meaningful improvement.

✅ Feedback 2: Need more time
Agreed. Since this assumption isn't backed by hard data yet, it’s reasonable to monitor post-launch behavior before enforcing stricter rules.

jetbldr · 2025-07-22T09:19:12Z

If this limitation is going to be enforced, we suggest first updating the configuration format used by the Good Will Alliance.

This would simplify the implementation and make the enforcement logic much cleaner in code.

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

This PR changes the bid submission limiting mechanism from builder address-based to builder name-based for more flexible configuration. The change allows for better grouping of builders that may use different addresses but share the same name or domain.

Key Changes:

Extended BuilderConfig struct with optional Name field and smart name extraction from URL domains
Updated bid limiting logic to use builder names instead of addresses in bidSimulator
Added comprehensive test coverage for name extraction and configuration handling

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

File	Description
`miner/minerconfig/config.go`	Adds `Name` field to `BuilderConfig`, implements name extraction logic and getter methods
`miner/minerconfig/config_test.go`	Comprehensive test suite covering name extraction, config methods, and edge cases
`miner/bid_simulator.go`	Updates bid limiting to use builder names instead of addresses with dual tracking system

Copilot · 2025-07-28T08:49:59Z

miner/bid_simulator.go

+	pendingMu     sync.RWMutex
+	pending       map[uint64]map[common.Address]map[common.Hash]struct{} // blockNumber -> builder -> bidHash -> struct{}
+	pendingByName map[uint64]map[string]map[common.Hash]struct{}         // blockNumber -> builderName -> bidHash -> struct{}


The code now maintains two separate pending maps (pending and pendingByName) that track the same data but with different keys. This duplication increases memory usage and complexity. Consider consolidating into a single data structure or clearly documenting why both are necessary.

Suggested change

pendingMu sync.RWMutex

pending map[uint64]map[common.Address]map[common.Hash]struct{} // blockNumber -> builder -> bidHash -> struct{}

pendingByName map[uint64]map[string]map[common.Hash]struct{} // blockNumber -> builderName -> bidHash -> struct{}

pendingMu sync.RWMutex

pending map[uint64]map[builderKey]map[common.Hash]struct{} // blockNumber -> builderKey -> bidHash -> struct{}

// builderKey is a composite key containing both common.Address and builderName.

Copilot · 2025-07-28T08:50:00Z

miner/bid_simulator.go


 	b.pending[blockNumber][builder][bidHash] = struct{}{}
+
+	// Also add to pendingByName
+	builderName := b.getBuilderName(builder)


The code assumes that b.pending[blockNumber][builder] exists, but there's no guarantee that the nested maps have been initialized. This will cause a panic if the maps don't exist. The same initialization pattern used for pendingByName should be applied here.

Suggested change

b.pending[blockNumber][builder][bidHash] = struct{}{}

// Also add to pendingByName

builderName := b.getBuilderName(builder)

// Ensure nested maps are initialized

if _, ok := b.pending[blockNumber]; !ok {

b.pending[blockNumber] = make(map[common.Address]map[common.Hash]struct{})

}

if _, ok := b.pending[blockNumber][builder]; !ok {

b.pending[blockNumber][builder] = make(map[common.Hash]struct{})

}

b.pending[blockNumber][builder][bidHash] = struct{}{}

// Also add to pendingByName

builderName := b.getBuilderName(builder)

if _, ok := b.pendingByName[blockNumber]; !ok {

b.pendingByName[blockNumber] = make(map[string]map[common.Hash]struct{})

}

if _, ok := b.pendingByName[blockNumber][builderName]; !ok {

b.pendingByName[blockNumber][builderName] = make(map[common.Hash]struct{})

}

Copilot · 2025-07-28T08:50:00Z

miner/minerconfig/config.go

+	// For invalid formats, return the original URL
+	return url


When the URL format is invalid, returning the original URL as the domain suffix could lead to unexpected behavior. Consider returning a more descriptive fallback value or logging a warning about the invalid URL format.

Suggested change

// For invalid formats, return the original URL

return url

// For invalid formats, log a warning and return a descriptive fallback value

log.Warn("Invalid URL format encountered in extractDomainSuffix", "url", url)

return "invalid"

Copilot · 2025-07-28T08:50:00Z

miner/bid_simulator.go

+	}
+
+	if len(b.pendingByName[blockNumber][builderName]) >= int(b.maxBidsPerBuilder) {
+		return fmt.Errorf("too many bids: exceeded limit of %d bids per builder name (%s) per block", b.maxBidsPerBuilder, builderName)


[nitpick] The error message includes the builder name, which could potentially expose sensitive information in logs. Consider whether the builder name should be included in error messages or if a sanitized version should be used.

huihzhao · 2025-07-28T09:14:53Z

If this limitation is going to be enforced, we suggest first updating the configuration format used by the Good Will Alliance.

This would simplify the implementation and make the enforcement logic much cleaner in code.

Template for builders

[Name of Builder]
Address = ["0x04d6...73F197ccd186","0x05fe...73F19dfdsafd86"] // up to 6 addresses can be configurated
RPC = ["https://rpc-builder.io/"] // up to 6 RPCs
Website = "https://example-builder.io"
Description = "This is the fastest builder on BSC network"
Contact = "example-builder@mail.com"

fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey

5b17621

jetbldr changed the title ~~fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey# MR: Limit bids by builder name instead of address~~ fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey Jul 18, 2025

Merge branch 'bnb-chain:develop' into develop

0c5eed5

zzzckck requested a review from Copilot July 28, 2025 08:48

Copilot AI reviewed Jul 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

allformless marked this pull request as draft January 19, 2026 03:17

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey #3241

fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey #3241

jetbldr commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

zzzckck commented Jul 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

jetbldr commented Jul 22, 2025

Uh oh!

jetbldr commented Jul 22, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

huihzhao commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

-	b.pending[blockNumber][builder][bidHash] = struct{}{}
-	// Also add to pendingByName
-	builderName := b.getBuilderName(builder)
+	// Ensure nested maps are initialized
+	if _, ok := b.pending[blockNumber]; !ok {
+		b.pending[blockNumber] = make(map[common.Address]map[common.Hash]struct{})
+	}
+	if _, ok := b.pending[blockNumber][builder]; !ok {
+		b.pending[blockNumber][builder] = make(map[common.Hash]struct{})
+	}
+	b.pending[blockNumber][builder][bidHash] = struct{}{}
+	// Also add to pendingByName
+	builderName := b.getBuilderName(builder)
+	if _, ok := b.pendingByName[blockNumber]; !ok {
+		b.pendingByName[blockNumber] = make(map[string]map[common.Hash]struct{})
+	}
+	if _, ok := b.pendingByName[blockNumber][builderName]; !ok {
+		b.pendingByName[blockNumber][builderName] = make(map[common.Hash]struct{})
+	}

-	// For invalid formats, return the original URL
-	return url
+	// For invalid formats, log a warning and return a descriptive fallback value
+	log.Warn("Invalid URL format encountered in extractDomainSuffix", "url", url)
+	return "invalid"

fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey #3241

Are you sure you want to change the base?

fix: limit builder submissions by name instead of pubkey #3241

Conversation

jetbldr commented Jul 18, 2025

Summary

Problem

Solution

Changes

1. Config structure update

2. New methods

3. Limit logic adjustment

Config example

Backward compatibility

Testing

Impact

Uh oh!

zzzckck commented Jul 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jetbldr commented Jul 22, 2025

Uh oh!

jetbldr commented Jul 22, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Key Changes:

Reviewed Changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

huihzhao commented Jul 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

zzzckck commented Jul 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading