Add EIP: MEVless Protocol#10855
Conversation
github-actions
Bot
added
c-new
|
✅ All reviewers have approved. |
eth-bot
added
e-consensus
|
@Lawliet-Chan you created RIP-8031 and in the PR specify this is for L2s. Is there a need for an EIP if this is aimed at L2s? |
|
waiting for response from the author to question posed by @abcoathup |
this protocol was designed for eth L1 MEV at first, but it needs some modifies in mempool, so I worried it may not allowed be added into EIP, and then added DA steps for L2 to be RIP. |
| title: MEVless Protocol | ||
| description: A protocol that prevents MEV attacks by constraining transaction ordering through blind sequencing and two-phase block execution. | ||
| author: Lawliet Chan (@lawliet-chan) | ||
| discussions-to: https://ethresear.ch/t/mevless-protocol-the-way-to-anti-mev/23084 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please update the discussions topic using the template
It is recommended to use the following template when creating a discussion-to thread for your EIP on ethereum-magicians.org. Each section has instructions set within a blockquote. Please read the instructions carefully before posting the topic.
Delete the blockquoted instructions below and everything above the following emdash line before posting your topic.
--
Discussion topic for EIP-XXXX
Update Log
This section should list significant updates to the EIP as the specification evolves. The first entry should be the PR to create the EIP. The recommended format for log entries is:
- yyyy-mm-dd: Single sentence description, commit link to commit
For example, using EIP-1:
- 2024-06-05: Enable external links to Chain Agnostic Improvement Proposals (CAIPs), commit 32dc740.
...Fill in the log for the EIP's initial draft below:
- yyyy-mm-dd: initial draft
External Reviews
This section should list notable reviews the EIP has received from the Ethereum community. These can include specific comments on this forum, timestamped audio/video exchanges, formal audits, or other external resources. This section should be the go-to for readers to understand the community's current assessment of the EIP. Aim for neutrality, quality & thoroughness over "cherry-picking" the most favorable reviews.
The recommended format for entries is:
- yyyy-mm-dd: Single sentence description, link to review
For example, using EIP-1559, one entry could be:
- 2020-12-01: "An Economic Analysis of EIP-1559", by Tim Roughgarden, full report
None as of yyyy-mm-dd.
Outstanding Issues
This section should highlight outstanding issues about the EIP, and, if possible, link to forums where these are being addressed. This section should allow readers to quickly understand what the most important TODOs for the EIP are, and how to best contribute. Once issues are resolved, they should be checked off with a note giving context on the resolution.
The recommended format for new entries is:
- yyyy-mm-dd: Issue description, link to issue
Once issues are addressed, these becomes:
- yyyy-mm-dd: Issue description, link to issue
- yyyy-mm-dd: Resolution description, link to resolution
For example, using EIP-3675, one entry could be:
- 2021-07-08: Repurpose the
DIFFICULTYopcode, tracking issue
- 2021-10-30: Introduce EIP-4399, EIP PR
If there are any known outstanding issues currently, fill them out now.
None as of yyyy-mm-dd.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated discussions-to thread.
I am very sorry I don't get your points, what do these Update Log External Reviews Outstanding Issues mean? I have seen some merged EIP PRs and I did not see those sections. If I need to deal with them, what should I do and do u have the template link? I will go to have a look.
Co-authored-by: Andrew B Coathup <28278242+abcoathup@users.noreply.github.com>
|
The commit c038a37 (as a parent of a20826a) contains errors. |
- Fixed MD022, MD031, MD032 linting issues - Cleaned up list formatting by removing extra blank lines - Moved Security Considerations section after Test Cases - Removed duplicate Reference Implementation section
- Add blank lines between headings and lists - Add blank lines before lists following text - Fixes MD022 and MD032 linting errors
g11tech
left a comment
g11tech
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
proposal looks fine, but I need to check the RIP to make a final decision,
please share the RIP link
I prefer to EIP because the Ethereum Layer1 has more defi dapps and it needs a more trustless anti-MEV solution. |
g11tech
left a comment
g11tech
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lgtm for draft, recommend to add python pseudocode like its done in other EL related proposals
eth-bot
left a comment
eth-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All Reviewers Have Approved; Performing Automatic Merge...
4 participants
Convert from https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/rip-8031-mevless-protocol-the-way-to-anti-mev/25615/8
Disscusion on: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/mevless-an-anti-mev-protocol/26800