Grant application - High-availability validator setup

[bufta]

Project Abstract

Validator leader selection via Raft consensus. Based on an already defined grant

Grant level

• [ ] Level 1: Up to $10,000, 2 approvals
• [x] Level 2: Up to $30,000, 3 approvals
• [ ] Level 3: Unlimited, 5 approvals (for >$100k: Web3 Foundation Council approval)

Application Checklist

• [x] The application template has been copied and aptly renamed (project_name.md).
• [x] I have read the application guidelines.
• [x] A BTC, Ethereum (USDT/USDC/DAI) or Polkadot/Kusama (aUSD) address for the payment of the milestones is provided inside the application.
• [x] The software delivered for this grant will be released under an open-source license specified in the application.
• [x] The initial PR contains only one commit (squash and force-push if needed).
• [x] The grant will only be announced once the first milestone has been accepted (see the announcement guidelines).
• [ ] I prefer the discussion of this application to take place in a private Element/Matrix channel. My username is: @_______:matrix.org (change the homeserver if you use a different one)

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[mmagician]

Would be great to see alternative validator setups! I think that when I wrote the RFP, I wasn't fully aware of how validators determine whether it's their turn. If I'm not mistaken, right now milestones 1 & 2 are kind of no-op, the validator should know exactly when they are valid block producers. I would suggest that the application is revised by doing some further research, and that the prospective grantee proposes a concrete revised mechanism for Raft consensus for nodes. At that point, we should ask some Parity consensus devs about this. It's somewhat analogous to the remote signing keystore, and might need changes to the core protocol (though maybe not, I'm not sure myself).

[semuelle]

ping @bufta

[bufta]

Hi @semuelle, sorry, I should have probably written an update here - we've been trying to contact Parity to confirm the ideas behind this proposal with their devs, as suggested by @mmagician. For what I understand, this is necessary for our proposal to be accepted. I will keep you informed how it's going (although no luck with response for now).

[bufta]

I'm coming back with an update - we sent the description of our approach along with some questions to the Parity developers and should receive their answers after 7th November. Hopefully, afterwards we will get back with our revised proposal.

[alxs]

Sounds good @bufta, thanks for the update. I'll put the application on hold until then.

[alxs]

@bufta just checking in here, any updates?

[Noc2]

As far as I know, they are still waiting for feedback from parity. So I will close the application for now and we can reopen it later.

[bufta]

@alxs @Noc2 Yes, indeed we are still waiting for the feedback from Parity devs. I will ping them once again. As soon as we get their opinion and adjust the proposal if necessary, we'll go with the PR once again.

[alxs]

@bufta as long as you don't force-push, you can leave a comment here and we'll reopen this PR.

[bufta]

Hi @alxs can I ask you to reopen this PR please? We're ready to follow with the solution that was discussed with Parity developers.

[Noc2]

@bufta, I reopened it. Feel free to update it.

[bufta]

Thank you @Noc2! The original proposal has been updated based on the feedback we got in late November 2022 from the Parity developers team.

[bufta]

Ah, yes, sorry @Noc2. I updated the file

[bufta]

The cost stems from the fact that we wanted to include in calculations the period when we were redoing and discussing the solutions in the autumn while checking with Parity. However, taking into account your comment @Noc2 , we will take this part on us. I edited the application accordingly.

[bufta]

Thank you @takahser for the review and suggestions

[bufta]

Just to check, is there anything else we should improve or add at this stage @Noc2 ? Are our answers sufficient or maybe we should add more information @takahser?

[github-actions[bot]]

Congratulations and welcome to the Web3 Foundation Grants Program! Please refer to our Milestone Delivery repository for instructions on how to submit milestones and invoices, our FAQ for frequently asked questions and the support section of our README for more ways to find answers to your questions.

Before you start, take a moment to read through our announcement guidelines for all communications related to the grant or make them known to the right person in your organisation. In particular, please don't announce the grant publicly before at least the first milestone of your project has been approved. At that point or shortly before, you can get in touch with us at [email protected] and we'll be happy to collaborate on an announcement about the work you’re doing.

Lastly, please remember to let us know in case you run into any delays or deviate from the deliverables in your application. You can either leave a comment here or directly request to amend your application via PR. We wish you luck with your project! :rocket: