-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 773
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
Early Pre-Shanghai EthereumJS Ephemeral Testnet #2298
Comments
I think @parithosh can easily seed us with tools for this (genesis EL+CL generation with deposits) + advanced tools |
Also if we are not concerned with "running" a multi-team testnet atleast before going live, we can just make do with a |
Yes, definitely no need for a multi-team testnet on this round, so we should keep this simple whereever possible. |
Post some of my casual discussions with @parithosh I propose the following plan:
|
EDIT: have to read better |
Can we close this now that we have the meta issue #2375 and the PR branch? |
No strong opinion, yeah, but why not. Everyone feel free to reopen though if the need arises. |
This morning after some exchange with @MariusVanDerWijden on Twitter we stumbled upon the idea of an early EthereumJS based Pre-Shanghai ephemeral testnet with selected EIPs activated.
To make it short: I really love the idea. 🔥 😎
We are pretty early on with various Shanghai CFI EIP implementations and this is exactly where we are with our client and what we CAN do right now. I guess this will be a great experience and learning to get such a setup going. So we should just do. We'll just see how much this will be used and what will come out of that and we should already do for fun and to get over some after-Merge-laziness. 😋 🙂
So I think it would be great if we have a testnet going within 2-3 weeks - eventually 4 weeks - time (I think one of the main benefits is to have this set up quickly so that people can run early tests against) with a dedicated chain ID, 2-3 bootnodes running, a public RPC endpoint and the following EIPs activated:
@parithosh do you find this useful enough that we can get some official support from you guys regarding infrastructure and some guidance and stuff? 🙂
Some things I can think of what we need to / should do from our side:
genesis.json
be natively/directly supported inCommon
genesis.json
in Common (would suggest dedicated marked-as-temporary hardfork JSON file), local client testQuestions:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: