feat: slash provider for downtime#39
Merged
Merged
Conversation
julienrbrt
requested review from
clockworkgr,
giuliostramondo,
giunatale and
tbruyelle
as code owners
julienrbrt
force-pushed
the
julien/slashing
branch
from
1560803 to
f76ccf2
Compare
julienrbrt
force-pushed
the
julien/slashing
branch
from
faa7817 to
3655dd1
Compare
tbruyelle
reviewed
Jun 2, 2026
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good first version.
What's missing from #38 :
- slashing params are not provider-configured, they come from the consumer slashing genesis
- use sliding window instead of epoch based for detection. While sliding window is a better downtime detector (see [1]), issue #38 requires an epoch-based detection system for the slash formulas and the challenge protocol. Not sure what's the best, we can probably discuss more about.
- offline validators are not excluded from fees distribution
- no optimistic challenge to refute downtime
I have just a few inline comments that should be addressed but other than that I would be OK to merge it as it is and iterate with the listed points with other following PRs.
[1]: why sliding window is a better detector than epoch:
Say N=10, threshold = miss >5.
A validator goes dark for blocks 5–14 (10 consecutive misses):
- Sliding: at block 14 the trailing window [5,14] has 10 misses → fires.
- Epoch: epoch 0 [0–9] saw misses 5–9 = 5 (not >5), epoch 1 [10–19] saw 10–14 = 5 (not >5) → never fires. The outage got diluted across the boundary.
Member
Author
|
Yes, see https://allinbits.slack.com/archives/C08EQRYHE95/p1779273259176249?thread_ts=1779269900.796499&cid=C08EQRYHE95 |
tbruyelle
approved these changes
Jun 3, 2026
julienrbrt
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 3, 2026
Resolve conflicts by keeping the multi-validator test code from julien/slashing-multi (the full individual validator downtime test) over the TODO placeholder from main's squash-merged PR #39.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
part 1 of #38