Skip to content
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.

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

Check ENR attnets field #18

Open
jrhea opened this issue May 13, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Check ENR attnets field #18

jrhea opened this issue May 13, 2020 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@jrhea
Copy link

jrhea commented May 13, 2020

Prysm was updating the ENR with validator committee assignments. This resulted in frequent ENR updates and leaks information about what validators a node is tied to:

Issue: Noticed high seq no’s in the topaz testnet due to frequent attnets field updates - ethereum/consensus-specs#1774

Fix: Add note to clarify when to update ENR record attnet - ethereum/consensus-specs#1775

Possible tests could be:

  • make sure the attnet field isn't changes each time a node's validator committee assignment is modified. Only persistent committee subscriptions should be advertised.
  • If a node hosts N validators then it should subscribe to N persistent committees
  • check the distribution of persistent subnet subscriptions?

If it helps prkl could be used to help inspect these fields for you. lmk, if you need any mods, or if you would like to use it as a library. 🤷‍♂️

@jrhea
Copy link
Author

jrhea commented May 13, 2020

Another implementation bug i found that is related to attnets:

Issue: Noticed anomalies in the distribution subnet subscriptions stored in enr records - prysmaticlabs/prysm#5696

Fix: prysmaticlabs/prysm#5734

@lsankar4033 lsankar4033 self-assigned this May 13, 2020
@lsankar4033
Copy link
Owner

Definitely, testing that the proper attnets exist in the ENR over epochs should be straightforward to test

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants