Ethereum

Following @vitalik.eth’s EthResearch post yesterday (https://ethresear.ch/t/sticking-to-8192-signatures-per-slot-post-ssf-how-and-why/17989) on what comes after single-slot finality, I have two questions for the experts:

PhD in aviation ∩ climate science | Aviator, diver, ETH maxi, nexialist | Host of /diving /ethfinance /eth-staker /geopolitics /science /singapore /thomas

1/ Why not first increase the MAX_EFFECTIVE_BALANCE as previously proposed and assess the consolidating effect on validator count down to a more manageable number of signatures?

Different views, the argument from @fradamt that convinced me is that we anyways need to plan updates such as SSF for the worst case, since in an adversarial setting validators can revert to disaggregating. So doing MaxEB and wait to see if it’s effective enough is not enough (I am still bullish MaxEB in general)

Robust Incentives Group @ Ethereum Foundation

https://rig.ethereum.org

No decision and timeline afaik but as you can see from Vitalik’s post or recent talks/conferences, there are many ongoing discussions around how to combine the various proposals together. I expect more in January as Dencun is fixed now, so discussions for next hard fork items will begin

Thank you @barnabe, and I’m grateful that you’re here to shed light on this. I understand the need to plan for more permanent solutions.

On a related note, is there now a decision and timeline to implement the MaxEB increase and the related EIP-7251? I realize they’re barely a few months old.