Skip to content

Optional proofs #1

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
kevaundray wants to merge 70 commits into
base: unstable
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Optional proofs #1

kevaundray wants to merge 70 commits into from
+9,847 −151

Conversation

@kevaundray
Copy link

@kevaundray kevaundray commented Dec 13, 2025

Issue Addressed

Which issue # does this PR address?

Proposed Changes

Please list or describe the changes introduced by this PR.

Additional Info

Please provide any additional information. For example, future considerations
or information useful for reviewers.

@kevaundray
initial commit
c2a3683
@kevaundray
add consensus types
f9f4517
@kevaundray
add config
accc829
@kevaundray
add proof cache
7694d9e
@kevaundray
add proof gen/verify traits
3a37238
@kevaundray
add registry proof gen/verification
7368ba2
@kevaundray
add execution proofs to da_checker
ba14574
@kevaundray
commit execution layer stub
ec773ce
@kevaundray
add execution proof boundaries similar to columns
971c743
@kevaundray
set min_execution_proof via the BeaconChain
86d0ffc
@kevaundray
set the zkvm config values from the cli
26e13a1
@kevaundray
Use ExecutionProofId since we no longer have multiple subnets
c5afb78
@kevaundray
add slot to ExecutionProof and refactor to remove ExecutionProofSubnetId
984a1e0
@kevaundray
refactor
6dfa83b
@kevaundray
modify chain_spec
6d6b994
@kevaundray
refactor for ExecutionProof
94027ce
@kevaundray
add registry_proof_gen
2a18784
@kevaundray
refactor proof_gen
d50c679
@kevaundray
refactor proof verification
adb890d
@kevaundray
commit proof_cache changes -- todo:remove this
958d360
@kevaundray
simplify engine_api struct
b7c3538
@kevaundray
fixup renaming changes
e1a0905
@kevaundray
add proof generation service
23a8a59
@kevaundray
Add execution proof observation and verification
fda4795
@kevaundray
Add ExecutionProofByRoots RPC layer
b0f81ed
@kevaundray
commit debug tests
665b485
@kevaundray
remove debug tests
9d5aacc
@kevaundray
commit GossipTopics/Discovery/PeerManagement
4b9802e
@kevaundray
Add proof available checking logic and has_execution_layer_and_proof_…
1bcb674 
…gen flag
@kevaundray
fix missing topic
1db670c
@kevaundray kevaundray mentioned this pull request Dec 13, 2025
Merged
@kevaundray
Copy link
Author

kevaundray commented Dec 13, 2025

Network tests need to be modified now that we are post Fulu -- also checking to see if any other behaviour has changed

@kevaundray
Copy link
Author

kevaundray commented Dec 13, 2025

Having a proof generating node also verify the execution payload via an EL introduces edge cases in the logic:

  • We don't have the invariant that all nodes on the execution proof subnet have the proof when they import a block
  • This is an issue for sync because we need to filter on nodes who say they have the block and are not proof generating nodes. It's likely that these nodes will have the proofs for blocks far in history, but the closer we get to the tip, the more likely they will have imported the block and have not seen the proofs
  • The reason this invariant was introduced is because we need debug_executionWitness from an updated EL on the block we want to generate proofs for. Removing the EL from the CL that has denoted themselves as a proof generating node, means we need to have another CL that is attached to an EL that may be out of sync with the proof generating CL.
    - This is likely okay and we can have the CL that is attached to the EL for debug_executionWitness have higher bandwidth; sentry node.

@kevaundray
Remove proof generation type node (#3)
22bbd3c 
* - update tests to have special zkvm nodes
- check for zkvm capability in the enr
- execution_proof_lookup_request filters zkvm nodes

* remove proof generation service

* cargo fmt

* fix

* update proof-gen-types

* endpoints exposed

* add basic tests

* cargo fmt

* remove executionWitness
@kevaundray
Copy link
Author

kevaundray commented Dec 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

One scenario, we should explicitly document is what happens when a zkVM enabled CL falls behind and needs to catch up; pre and post glamsterdam. Noting that pre glamsterdam, the node will be in optimistic sync mode. Post glamsterdam, we'd want to know what happens when proving takes longer than the alloted deadline

@kevaundray
Pass min_proofs_required parameter in da_checker (#6)
127d3aa
@kevaundray
Merge branch 'unstable' into optional-proofs
cc36571
@kevaundray
Add ExecutionWitness sentry + ExecutionProofsByRange + Syncing Logic (#5
11578fb 
)

* execution-witness

* update dummyEL wrapper

* Merge Execution Witness Sentry into ExecutionProofsByRange (#9)

* add execution proofs by range and persist proofs in blobs_db

* use the same caching mechanism for proofsbyrange that columnsbyrange uses

* also fix proofsbyroot to hit da_checker then store

* cargo fmt

* lint fix

* fmt

* update database schema

* small cleanup

* update configs

* update to ignore new geth flags

* cargo fmt

* cargo lint

* sync: wire execution proofs through range/backfill sync

- track execution proof requests in block coupling logic
- add proof-by-range retries with zkvm peer selection
- skip proof processing when DA cache already satisfies minimum
- add testss

* make cargo fmt

* cargo sort

* update kurtosis script

* update cargo lock
@kevaundray
Copy link
Author

kevaundray commented Dec 31, 2025

TODO: We can remove execution-witness-sentry

@kevaundray
Copy link
Author

kevaundray commented Dec 31, 2025

I've squash merged in different PRs/branches into this branch

@kevaundray
Copy link
Author

kevaundray commented Jan 1, 2026

dummy EL kurtosis PR for kurtosis added here: ethpandaops/ethereum-package#1276

@kevaundray
Copy link
Author

kevaundray commented Jan 19, 2026

Note:

We will copy all of this over to a new branch called optional-proofs-old, then reset this branch.

@frisitano will eventually make a new PR with the new changes in the consensus-specs that would initially target unstable for ease of development, then target the optional-proofs branch (which should be easy since we've reset it to unstable)

Nothing urgent here, just a notice for anyone following this branch and for future reference

@kevaundray kevaundray mentioned this pull request Jan 19, 2026
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@kevaundray