## Issue Addressed
While testing withdrawals with @ethDreamer we noticed lighthouse is sending empty batches when an error occurs. As LH peer receiving this, we would consider this a low tolerance action because the peer is claiming the batch is right and is empty.
## Proposed Changes
If any kind of error occurs, send a error response instead
## Additional Info
Right now we don't handle such thing as a partial batch with an error. If an error is received, the whole batch is discarded. Because of this it makes little sense to send partial batches that end with an error, so it's better to do the proposed solution instead of sending empty batches.
## Proposed Changes
Update the Gnosis chain bootnodes. The current list of Gnosis bootnodes were abandoned at some point before the Gnosis merge and are now failing to bootstrap peers. There's a workaround list of bootnodes here: https://docs.gnosischain.com/updates/20221208-temporary-bootnodes
The list from this PR represents the long-term bootnodes run by the Gnosis team. We will also try to set up SigP bootnodes for Gnosis chain at some point.
## Proposed Changes
With proposer boosting implemented (#2822) we have an opportunity to re-org out late blocks.
This PR adds three flags to the BN to control this behaviour:
* `--disable-proposer-reorgs`: turn aggressive re-orging off (it's on by default).
* `--proposer-reorg-threshold N`: attempt to orphan blocks with less than N% of the committee vote. If this parameter isn't set then N defaults to 20% when the feature is enabled.
* `--proposer-reorg-epochs-since-finalization N`: only attempt to re-org late blocks when the number of epochs since finalization is less than or equal to N. The default is 2 epochs, meaning re-orgs will only be attempted when the chain is finalizing optimally.
For safety Lighthouse will only attempt a re-org under very specific conditions:
1. The block being proposed is 1 slot after the canonical head, and the canonical head is 1 slot after its parent. i.e. at slot `n + 1` rather than building on the block from slot `n` we build on the block from slot `n - 1`.
2. The current canonical head received less than N% of the committee vote. N should be set depending on the proposer boost fraction itself, the fraction of the network that is believed to be applying it, and the size of the largest entity that could be hoarding votes.
3. The current canonical head arrived after the attestation deadline from our perspective. This condition was only added to support suppression of forkchoiceUpdated messages, but makes intuitive sense.
4. The block is being proposed in the first 2 seconds of the slot. This gives it time to propagate and receive the proposer boost.
## Additional Info
For the initial idea and background, see: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2353#issuecomment-950238004
There is also a specification for this feature here: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/3034
Co-authored-by: Michael Sproul <micsproul@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: pawan <pawandhananjay@gmail.com>
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
This is a *potentially* contentious change, but I find it annoying that the validator monitor logs `WARN` and `ERRO` for imperfect attestations. Perfect attestation performance is unachievable (don't believe those photo-shopped beauty magazines!) since missed and poorly-packed blocks by other validators will reduce your performance.
When the validator monitor is on with 10s or more validators, I find the logs are washed out with ERROs that are not worth investigating. I suspect that users who really want to know if validators are missing attestations can do so by matching the content of the log, rather than the log level.
I'm open to feedback about this, especially from anyone who is relying on the current log levels.
## Additional Info
NA
## Breaking Changes Notes
The validator monitor will no longer emit `WARN` and `ERRO` logs for sub-optimal attestation performance. The logs will now be emitted at `INFO` level. This change was introduced to avoid cluttering the `WARN` and `ERRO` logs with alerts that are frequently triggered by the actions of other network participants (e.g., a missed block) and require no action from the user.
## Issue Addressed
Implementing the light_client_gossip topics but I'm not there yet.
Which issue # does this PR address?
Partially #3651
## Proposed Changes
Add light client gossip topics.
Please list or describe the changes introduced by this PR.
I'm going to Implement light_client_finality_update and light_client_optimistic_update gossip topics. Currently I've attempted the former and I'm seeking feedback.
## Additional Info
I've only implemented the light_client_finality_update topic because I wanted to make sure I was on the correct path. Also checking that the gossiped LightClientFinalityUpdate is the same as the locally constructed one is not implemented because caching the updates will make this much easier. Could someone give me some feedback on this please?
Please provide any additional information. For example, future considerations
or information useful for reviewers.
Co-authored-by: GeemoCandama <104614073+GeemoCandama@users.noreply.github.com>
