Expand merge migration docs (#3430)
## Issue Addressed Resolves #3424 ## Proposed Changes This PR expands the merge migration docs to include (hopefully) clearer guidance on the steps required. It's inspired by @winksaville's work in #3426 but takes a more drastic approach to rewriting large sections. * Add a prominent _When?_ section * Add links to execution engine configuration guides * Add links to community guides * Fix the location of the _Strict fee recipient_ section
This commit is contained in:
parent
5d317779bb
commit
83666e04fd
@ -1,20 +1,69 @@
|
||||
# Merge Migration
|
||||
|
||||
This document provides detail for users who have been running a Lighthouse node *before* the merge
|
||||
and are now preparing their node for the merge transition.
|
||||
This document provides detail for users who want to run a merge-ready Lighthouse node.
|
||||
|
||||
## "Pre-Merge" and "Post-Merge"
|
||||
> If you are running a testnet node, this configuration is necessary _now_.
|
||||
|
||||
As of [v2.4.0](https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/releases/tag/v2.4.0) Lighthouse can be considered
|
||||
to have two modes:
|
||||
## Necessary Configuration
|
||||
|
||||
- "Pre-merge": `--execution-endpoint` flag *is not* provided.
|
||||
- "Post-merge": `--execution-endpoint` flag *is* provided.
|
||||
There are two configuration changes required for a Lighthouse node to operate correctly throughout
|
||||
the merge:
|
||||
|
||||
A "pre-merge" node, by definition, will fail to transition through the merge. Such a node *must* be
|
||||
upgraded before the Bellatrix upgrade.
|
||||
1. You *must* run your own execution engine such as Geth or Nethermind alongside Lighthouse.
|
||||
You *must* update your Lighthouse configuration to connect to the execution engine using new
|
||||
flags which are documented on this page in the
|
||||
[Connecting to an execution engine](#connecting-to-an-execution-engine) section.
|
||||
2. If your Lighthouse node has validators attached you *must* nominate an Ethereum address to
|
||||
receive transactions tips from blocks proposed by your validators. This is covered on the
|
||||
[Suggested fee recipient](./suggested-fee-recipient.md) page.
|
||||
|
||||
## Migration
|
||||
Additionally, you _must_ update Lighthouse to a merge-compatible release in the weeks before
|
||||
the merge. Merge releases are available now for all testnets.
|
||||
|
||||
## When?
|
||||
|
||||
You must configure your node to be merge-ready before the Bellatrix fork occurs on the network
|
||||
on which your node is operating.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Mainnet**: the Bellatrix fork epoch has not yet been announced. It's possible to set up a
|
||||
merge-ready node now, but some execution engines will require additional configuration. Please see
|
||||
the section on [Execution engine configuration](#execution-engine-configuration) below.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Goerli (Prater)**, **Ropsten**, **Sepolia**, **Kiln**: you must have a merge-ready configuration
|
||||
right now.
|
||||
|
||||
## Connecting to an execution engine
|
||||
|
||||
The Lighthouse beacon node must connect to an execution engine in order to validate the transactions
|
||||
present in post-merge blocks. Two new flags are used to configure this connection:
|
||||
|
||||
- `--execution-endpoint <URL>`: the URL of the execution engine API. Often this will be
|
||||
`http://localhost:8551`.
|
||||
- `--execution-jwt <FILE>`: the path to the file containing the JWT secret shared by Lighthouse and the
|
||||
execution engine.
|
||||
|
||||
If you set up an execution engine with `--execution-endpoint` then you *must* provide a JWT secret
|
||||
using `--execution-jwt`. This is a mandatory form of authentication that ensures that Lighthouse
|
||||
has authority to control the execution engine.
|
||||
|
||||
### Execution engine configuration
|
||||
|
||||
Each execution engine has its own flags for configuring the engine API and JWT. Please consult
|
||||
the relevant page for your execution engine for the required flags:
|
||||
|
||||
- [Geth: Connecting to Consensus Clients](https://geth.ethereum.org/docs/interface/consensus-clients)
|
||||
- [Nethermind: Running Nethermind Post Merge](https://docs.nethermind.io/nethermind/first-steps-with-nethermind/running-nethermind-post-merge)
|
||||
- [Besu: Prepare For The Merge](https://besu.hyperledger.org/en/stable/HowTo/Upgrade/Prepare-for-The-Merge/)
|
||||
|
||||
Once you have configured your execution engine to open up the engine API (usually on port 8551) you
|
||||
should add the URL to your `lighthouse bn` flags with `--execution-endpoint <URL>`, as well as
|
||||
the path to the JWT secret with `--execution-jwt <FILE>`.
|
||||
|
||||
> NOTE: Geth v1.10.21 or earlier requires a manual TTD override to communicate with Lighthouse over
|
||||
> the engine API on mainnet. We recommend waiting for a compatible Geth release before configuring
|
||||
> Lighthouse-Geth on mainnet.
|
||||
|
||||
### Example
|
||||
|
||||
Let us look at an example of the command line arguments for a pre-merge production staking BN:
|
||||
|
||||
@ -60,10 +109,7 @@ merge are ensuring that `--execution-endpoint` and `--execution-jwt` flags are p
|
||||
you can even leave the `--eth1-endpoints` flag there, it will be ignored. This is not recommended as
|
||||
a deprecation warning will be logged and Lighthouse *may* remove these flags in the future.
|
||||
|
||||
There are no changes required for the validator client, apart from ensure it has been updated to the
|
||||
same version as the beacon node. Check the version with `lighthouse --version`.
|
||||
|
||||
## The relationship between `--eth1-endpoints` and `--execution-endpoint`
|
||||
### The relationship between `--eth1-endpoints` and `--execution-endpoint`
|
||||
|
||||
Pre-merge users will be familiar with the `--eth1-endpoints` flag. This provides a list of Ethereum
|
||||
"eth1" nodes (e.g., Geth, Nethermind, etc). Each beacon node (BN) can have multiple eth1 endpoints
|
||||
@ -90,7 +136,16 @@ contains the transaction history of the Ethereum chain, there is no longer a nee
|
||||
be used for all such queries. Therefore we can say that where `--execution-endpoint` is included
|
||||
`--eth1-endpoints` should be omitted.
|
||||
|
||||
## What about multiple execution endpoints?
|
||||
## FAQ
|
||||
|
||||
### Can I use `http://localhost:8545` for the execution endpoint?
|
||||
|
||||
Most execution nodes use port `8545` for the Ethereum JSON-RPC API. Unless custom configuration is
|
||||
used, an execution node _will not_ provide the necessary engine API on port `8545`. You should
|
||||
not attempt to use `http://localhost:8545` as your engine URL and should instead use
|
||||
`http://localhost:8551`.
|
||||
|
||||
### What about multiple execution endpoints?
|
||||
|
||||
Since an execution engine can only have one connected BN, the value of having multiple execution
|
||||
engines connected to the same BN is very low. An execution engine cannot be shared between BNs to
|
||||
@ -99,3 +154,14 @@ reduce costs.
|
||||
Whilst having multiple execution engines connected to a single BN might be useful for advanced
|
||||
testing scenarios, Lighthouse (and other consensus clients) have decided to support *only one*
|
||||
execution endpoint. Such scenarios could be resolved with a custom-made HTTP proxy.
|
||||
|
||||
## Additional Resources
|
||||
|
||||
There are several community-maintained guides which provide more background information, as well as
|
||||
guidance for specific setups.
|
||||
|
||||
- [Ethereum.org: The Merge](https://ethereum.org/en/upgrades/merge/)
|
||||
- [Ethereum Staking Launchpad: Merge Readiness](https://launchpad.ethereum.org/en/merge-readiness).
|
||||
- [CoinCashew: Ethereum Merge Upgrade Checklist](https://www.coincashew.com/coins/overview-eth/ethereum-merge-upgrade-checklist-for-home-stakers-and-validators)
|
||||
- [EthDocker: Merge Preparation](https://eth-docker.net/docs/About/MergePrep/)
|
||||
- [Remy Roy: How to join the Goerli/Prater merge testnet](https://github.com/remyroy/ethstaker/blob/main/merge-goerli-prater.md)
|
||||
|
@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
|
||||
# Suggested Fee Recipient
|
||||
|
||||
*Note: these documents are not relevant until the Bellatrix (Merge) upgrade has occurred.*
|
||||
The _fee recipient_ is an Ethereum address nominated by a beacon chain validator to receive
|
||||
tips from user transactions. If you run validators on a network that has already merged
|
||||
or is due to merge soon then you should nominate a fee recipient for your validators.
|
||||
|
||||
## Fee recipient trust assumptions
|
||||
## Background
|
||||
|
||||
During post-merge block production, the Beacon Node (BN) will provide a `suggested_fee_recipient` to
|
||||
the execution node. This is a 20-byte Ethereum address which the EL might choose to set as the
|
||||
@ -13,32 +15,25 @@ it may use any address it chooses. It is assumed that an honest execution node *
|
||||
`suggested_fee_recipient`, but users should note this trust assumption. Check out the
|
||||
[strict fee recipient](#strict-fee-recipient) section for how to mitigate this assumption.
|
||||
|
||||
The `suggested_fee_recipient` can be provided to the VC, who will transmit it to the BN. The BN also
|
||||
The `suggested_fee_recipient` can be provided to the VC, which will transmit it to the BN. The BN also
|
||||
has a choice regarding the fee recipient it passes to the execution node, creating another
|
||||
noteworthy trust assumption.
|
||||
|
||||
To be sure *you* control your fee recipient value, run your own BN and execution node (don't use
|
||||
third-party services).
|
||||
|
||||
The Lighthouse VC provides three methods for setting the `suggested_fee_recipient` (also known
|
||||
## How to configure a suggested fee recipient
|
||||
|
||||
The Lighthouse VC provides two methods for setting the `suggested_fee_recipient` (also known
|
||||
simply as the "fee recipient") to be passed to the execution layer during block production. The
|
||||
Lighthouse BN also provides a method for defining this value, should the VC not transmit a value.
|
||||
|
||||
Assuming trustworthy nodes, the priority for the four methods is:
|
||||
Assuming trustworthy nodes, the priority for the three methods is:
|
||||
|
||||
1. `validator_definitions.yml`
|
||||
1. `--suggested-fee-recipient` provided to the VC.
|
||||
1. `--suggested-fee-recipient` provided to the BN.
|
||||
|
||||
## Strict Fee Recipient
|
||||
|
||||
If the flag `--strict-fee-recipient` is set in the validator client, Lighthouse will refuse to sign any block whose
|
||||
`fee_recipient` does not match the `suggested_fee_recipient` sent by this validator. This applies to both the normal
|
||||
block proposal flow and block proposals through the builder API. Proposals through the builder API are more likely
|
||||
to have a discrepancy in `fee_recipient` so you should be aware of how your connected relay sends proposer payments before
|
||||
using this flag. If this flag is used, a fee recipient mismatch in the builder API flow will result in a fallback to the
|
||||
local execution engine for payload construction, where a strict fee recipient check will still be applied.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Setting the fee recipient in the `validator_definitions.yml`
|
||||
|
||||
Users can set the fee recipient in `validator_definitions.yml` with the `suggested_fee_recipient`
|
||||
@ -168,4 +163,22 @@ curl -X DELETE \
|
||||
null
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Strict Fee Recipient
|
||||
|
||||
If the flag `--strict-fee-recipient` is set in the validator client, Lighthouse will refuse to sign any block whose
|
||||
`fee_recipient` does not match the `suggested_fee_recipient` sent by this validator. This applies to both the normal
|
||||
block proposal flow and block proposals through the builder API. Proposals through the builder API are more likely
|
||||
to have a discrepancy in `fee_recipient` so you should be aware of how your connected relay sends proposer payments before
|
||||
using this flag. If this flag is used, a fee recipient mismatch in the builder API flow will result in a fallback to the
|
||||
local execution engine for payload construction, where a strict fee recipient check will still be applied.
|
||||
|
||||
## FAQ
|
||||
|
||||
### Why do I have to nominate an Ethereum address as the fee recipient?
|
||||
|
||||
You might wonder why the validator can't just accumulate transactions fees in the same way that it
|
||||
accumulates other staking rewards. The reason for this is that transaction fees are computed and
|
||||
validated by the execution node, and therefore need to be paid to an address that exists on the
|
||||
execution chain. Validators use BLS keys which do not correspond to Ethereum addresses, so they
|
||||
have no "presence" on the execution chain. Therefore it's necessary for each validator to nominate
|
||||
a separate fee recipient address.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user