Skip to content

Mutually exclusive certs/txs in RBs #19

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
Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: leios
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Mutually exclusive certs/txs in RBs #19

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@ch1bo
Copy link
Member

@ch1bo ch1bo commented Sep 25, 2025

Detail chain inclusion rules to only allow RBs with certs or txs - mutually exclusive. Also provide a sentence of rationale.

bwbush
bwbush reviewed Sep 25, 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.

I'm going to abstain from approving this because I don't have a strong opinion on it, aside from I think that this change is not needed for safety.

I am concerned that we not alter the protocol specified in the draft CIP while the CIP is under review.

will-break-it
will-break-it requested changes Sep 25, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@will-break-it will-break-it left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good aside from minor comments. Please run the format script on these changes again.

@ch1bo
Copy link
Member Author

ch1bo commented Sep 25, 2025

I'm going to abstain from approving this because I don't have a strong opinion on it, aside from I think that this change is not needed for safety.

It will improve our margin for L_diff, don't you think?

I am concerned that we not alter the protocol specified in the draft CIP while the CIP is under review.

I am basically reinstating the specification that was present when we published it (we changed it to the "may" phrasing on September 5th).

will-break-it
will-break-it requested changes Sep 30, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@will-break-it will-break-it left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd advocate to not reintroduce footnotes. and minor changes for phrasing around the exclusivity of certs over txs in RBs

@ch1bo ch1bo requested a review from will-break-it October 2, 2025 13:04
ch1bo added 2 commits October 2, 2025 15:14
@ch1bo
Mutually exclusive certs/txs in RBs
3a538b7 
Detail chain inclusion rules to only allow RBs with certs or txs -
mutually exclusive. Also provide a sentence of rationale.
@ch1bo
Address reviewer comments
bbf0a10
@ch1bo ch1bo force-pushed the mutual-exclusive-certs-txs branch from 6f3ee7b to bbf0a10 Compare October 2, 2025 13:14
@ch1bo ch1bo mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2025
Open
8 tasks
@ch1bo
Copy link
Member Author

ch1bo commented Oct 3, 2025

Related to input-output-hk/ouroboros-leios#504

@ch1bo
Copy link
Member Author

ch1bo commented Oct 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

@will-break-it You had requested a different format, which I changed. What's your latest take on these change?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@nfrisby nfrisby Awaiting requested review from nfrisby

@bwbush bwbush Awaiting requested review from bwbush

@will-break-it will-break-it Awaiting requested review from will-break-it

1 more reviewer

@wolf31o2 wolf31o2 wolf31o2 approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@ch1bo @wolf31o2 @bwbush @will-break-it