😬  If client diversity is so important for ethereum can we get more accurate monitoring tools that are not based on self-reporting and provide confidence on the displayed stats?

Founder of @rotkiapp🐦, the portfolio tracker that protects your privacy.

#Berlin. University of Tokyo graduate. Marathon runner. #ethereum developer. #birding

There's a bunch of different efforts in this direction, but ultimately it's actually a very hard (technical) problem. There's no way to get confidence on the data unless you have control over operator systems (and no one wants that) or you're running everything in a TEE (won't happen from technical+speed perspective).

I know it's a hard technical problem but it needs to be addressed. We can't fly blind as a community.

Also the systems monitoring diversity should be air-tight. Not like this one here where it does not even add properly up to 100%.

Gives zero confidence on correctness.

just report the primary not secondary EL. The point of these statistics are to guide people to decide which EL/CL to run.

Which means you only care about the primary EL, as in the armageddon case this is what would affect how the network behaves

There's a lot of nuance here that you're sidestepping. Data doesn't end up to 100% for a variety of logical reasons, here's one example: a validator client can be connected to multiple EL nodes at the same time (via various manners). What's the correct way to report this?