Skip to content
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

Make arbitrate deal able to slash miners for never posting the sector #306

Open
whyrusleeping opened this issue May 29, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

Comments

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

whyrusleeping commented May 29, 2019

if a miner and a client make a deal, and the miner never posts the sector, the client should have some recourse. The miner can never get paid for this data, but the client is out their fees for setting up the payment channel, their time, and bandwidth. So that kinda sucks for them.

This isnt easy, as we have to balance this solution against the client not being allowed to slash the miner twice for the same failed deal, all while avoiding putting information about each deal on chain.

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member Author

one way we could do this would be to allow the unstarted deal slashing only for the duration of one proving period after the deal start, then when the miner is slashed, add this to the arbitrated deals set. I think this has the desired effect, needs more thought

@anorth
Copy link
Member

anorth commented Jun 5, 2019

ArbitrateDeal currently looks to penalise both pledge and storage collateral, which doesn't match faults.md. While updating, could you clarify that too?

@taoshengshi
Copy link

taoshengshi commented Jun 6, 2019

At the beginning of payment channel setting up, miner and client both should put collateral (that is a kind of storage collateral) into a payment channel which should trigger arbitrated deal (which acts like smart contract) to penalize either side of the payment channel who breach the deal after proving period expire.

@anorth
Copy link
Member

anorth commented Jul 10, 2019

In general, collateral is only required to be posted by the miner when committing a sector. For the first sector a miner could post (but hasn't yet, hence the need to arbitrate), there will be no collateral to penalise. But I guess for subsequent deals, where a miner does have some committed sectors, the collateral for those sectors could be penalised. The miner would then have to post new collateral before committing further sectors.

Unless we change how and when collateral is posted, arbitration may have to handle the possibility that the miner has zero balance.

@pooja pooja mentioned this issue Jul 30, 2019
18 tasks
@pooja pooja mentioned this issue Aug 27, 2019
22 tasks
@pooja pooja removed the P1 label Sep 12, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants