[DOCS] An example: Create an op stack Rollup testnet with `op-deployer`
Description:
I shared an article in the Create an op stack Rollup testnet with op-deployer titled Create an op stack Rollup testnet with op-deployer. My goal was to provide an example for other users to reference.
While deploying L1 contracts using op-deployer/v0.0.13, I encountered the following issue:
-
_gameTypeis set to1, whereas inop-mainnetandop-sepolia, this value should be0. - I exported the L2 configuration using the command:
The output shows./op-deployer inspect deploy-config --workdir .deployer "$L2_CHAIN_ID" > l2-chain-config.json"respectedGameType": 0, despite no modifications to the configuration. Further investigation is needed.
Since the related documentation is still being updated, users face significant challenges when creating an OP Stack Rollup testnet. I hope to see documentation updates soon and would appreciate any feedback or assistance regarding this issue in my shared article.
@opfocus This is such a nice initiative, i'll go through this and let you know my experience. Thanks for putting this together.
https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/docs/issues/1530
@opfocus op-deployer only deploys the permissioned dispute game, game type 1. It also does it with a placeholder for the absolute prestate hash, which goes in each game type's contract. It's a circular dependency because to use the preimage and absolute prestate hash, you need the chains configuration included in there, but you can't do that until the chain has been deployed.
@krofax is working on a a document that goes into these details here: https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/docs/pull/1539
Suppose I want to have one chain deployed with permissioned fault proofs. Is there any issue that could arise from this configuration discrepancy?
Currently, docs is mixed up between an old tutorials/chain manual deployment way and the new op-deployer way make it impossible for external chain operator to follow and launch their chain.
Also I think op-deployer now default to FaultDisputeGame not L2OO?
We've observed a significantly high number of RPC calls on Alchemy when using the permissioned fault-proof system. The majority of these are eth_call requests targeting the Permissioned Dispute Game contracts — totaling approximately 13-15 million requests per day.
It appears the challenger is making these calls very frequently, which may be contributing heavily to the RPC load.
Challenger version: v1.4.0
Hi @opfocus I have a rich PR, that overhauls the old "Create an op stack Rollup testnet with op-deployer", do you mind taking a look?