danny

> As Jacek has mentioned, one modification we can make is to keep track of duplicates sent to us from our peers so that we don't propagate to peers that...

> The proposed change would be to not only store the message-id from peers, but also the peers that have sent us this exact message. Then when we propagate/publish, we...

This is a consensus issue that is regularly found in fuzzing in which Prysm disagrees on the output of a state transition. That call does require what we might considered...

To be clear, bits vs balances *are not* the same functionality ```python if previous_epoch_target_balance * 3 >= total_active_balance * 2: state.current_justified_checkpoint = Checkpoint(epoch=previous_epoch, root=get_block_root(state, previous_epoch)) state.justification_bits[1] = 0b1 if current_epoch_target_balance...

> believe this is flawed: in this particular case, then the bit at index 1 will still be set because it would have been the bit at index 0 in...

I'd like input here from other client teams but I am happy to put this on ice until *after* Merge mainnet releases are complete. Adding DO NOT MERGE tag

My scratchpad notes I'm working off of https://notes.ethereum.org/BHG6JUibQ8CNqpUeVHd1dw?edit

yes

@arnetheduck do you mean re-using indices? The way this is spec'd allows for re-use but does not enable re-use Or do you mean something else entirely?

I don't think we are going to get to a place where we can solidify and commit to such a future-proof predicate interface before we get nearer a merge design...