You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Why does GPBFT justification format bother with including the chain at all? It seems for any given message we can always infer: 1) whether it should be justified, and 2) what its justified chain should be.
At the wire level communication at least there is no need at all for having it.
Its removal will also simplify the FIP.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
2025-03-19 standup: agreed not to take on before F3 activation so as to avoid introducing unnecessary code changes after the code freeze. This can get picked up post activation. I have adjusted milestone accordingly.
Per internal 2025-03-28 slack conversation, it wasn't deemed critical to make it an immediate followup/cleanup after F3 activation. As a result, I have reassigned its milestone.
Why does GPBFT justification format bother with including the chain at all? It seems for any given message we can always infer: 1) whether it should be justified, and 2) what its justified chain should be.
At the wire level communication at least there is no need at all for having it.
Its removal will also simplify the FIP.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: