-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
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.
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
Mainnet bootstrap strategy, how to get the power table? #596
Comments
So... I still want to do option 2, but option 1 is nice because it requires no coordination and it doesn't preclude option 2. It does require a small FIP update, but I don't expect it'll be that controversial. The issue with option 2 is that the CAR "roots" are currently expected to be a tipset. Ideally, we'd have a single root metadata object pointing to the chain and whatever else we want, but... that's not what we have right now. |
So, I'd say go with option 1 and punt option 2 into the future. |
Proposal:
|
Note: the alternative is to do this in the migration itself. However, I'd like to:
|
Ah, so, we need all the worker keys. This is best done through a migration of some form, unfortunately. |
Ok, discussed with @jennijuju: we can do two migrations but avoid migrating the actor code in the second migration. Instead, the second migration will just create the power table and attach it to the power actor. |
Some open questions for option 2 is how do we write the migration? Is there a need to create a nv-skeleton in Lotus/GST/Filecoin-FFI? Will it be similar to the Lightning/Thunder upgrade? We should also give Forest a early heads up on our strategy here, so that they can prep for this migration. |
Additional 2024-09-11 conversation:
I added these tasks to the issue description:
Please update/correct where wrong or outdated. |
We discussed the migration option in standup. Unfortunately, Forest would have to implement the migration as well and the migration will likely be non-standard (likely) because we don't want to bump the actors version to make the migration small. We can still do that, but we need to discuss it with them. We also discussed some alternatives:
|
I've discussed this with the F3 team and @jennijuju and it sounds like option 1 isn't so bad after all. We'd have two releases:
Release A will have (a) an environment variable to specify the F3 bootstrap power table CID, (b) the ability to specify it when importing a snapshot, and (c) will be able to import snapshots without specifying the variable (?) (we'll have to assess the risk of this as the peer won't be able to participate in F3). Release B will be identical to release A except the bootstrap power table CID will be set. We'll need to coordinate with Forest/Venus to make sure this works for them. |
While writing this up, I did have another thought... technically, we can start late and our certificate store even supports this (technically). To bootstrap, we:
|
Correct me if I understand this wrong: we're looking for the earliest cert signed by the current PT and then just verify all the subsequent certificates until the boostrap is finished. |
Option 1: Save the power table in a new field in the PowerTable actor during migration
Option 2: Bootstrap from chain lookback, oh-shit-store, initial power table cid snapshots, in first update after upgrade Lotus includes initial power table CID in binary.
Tasks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: