Amending the P2P Layer
Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.
If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?
protocol network
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
add a comment |
Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.
If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?
protocol network
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
add a comment |
Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.
If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?
protocol network
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
Is it possible to amend the P2P layer of Tezos? As far as I understand from here, the amendment process is only for the economic protocol.
If we wanted to suggest changes to how the P2P layer works through future research, how would we go about it? Through a hard fork?
protocol network
protocol network
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
563418
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
asked Apr 3 at 3:48
ralexralex
936
936
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.
People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.
There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:
The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.
For more details see here.
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.
– Pierre Chambart
yesterday
add a comment |
There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "698"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f980%2famending-the-p2p-layer%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.
People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.
There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:
The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.
For more details see here.
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.
– Pierre Chambart
yesterday
add a comment |
The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.
People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.
There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:
The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.
For more details see here.
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.
– Pierre Chambart
yesterday
add a comment |
The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.
People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.
There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:
The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.
For more details see here.
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
The P2P layer is part of the shell and is not amended via the onchain governance. Improvements to the existing approach are always welcome by contributing to the gitlab.
People are also free to work on separate implementations of the shell and explore different approaches to optimization while still remaining compatible with the existing shell. And of course nothing stops anyone from deciding they want to be incompatible and attempt to fork.
There is already an implementation in Rust underway whose motivation is described as:
The Tezos ecosystem will benefit from an increase in the diversity of its nodes (multiple implementations across a range of different programing languages & operating systems). It allows us to verify that the protocol is unambiguous. It keeps the door open for innovation and secures the honesty of all participants.
For more details see here.
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
edited yesterday
luchonacho
563418
563418
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
answered Apr 3 at 6:37
cousinitcousinit
1,060314
1,060314
You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.
– Pierre Chambart
yesterday
add a comment |
You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.
– Pierre Chambart
yesterday
You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.
– Pierre Chambart
yesterday
You don't have to fork even if you make a different version of the protocol.
– Pierre Chambart
yesterday
add a comment |
There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
There is a version negotiation at the initialization of the connection. You can make an incompatible version of the P2P protocol as long as it has a different version name. For the network not to be split, you need at least one node that speaks both versions of the protocol.
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
answered yesterday
Pierre ChambartPierre Chambart
1962
1962
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Pierre Chambart is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Tezos Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftezos.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f980%2famending-the-p2p-layer%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
