Add ERC: Minimal Upgradeable Proxies #604

Vectorized · 2024-08-23T06:28:11Z

https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/minimal-upgradeable-proxies/20868

eip-review-bot · 2024-08-23T06:31:11Z

✅ All reviewers have approved.

abcoathup · 2024-08-23T10:42:14Z

ERCS/erc-9999.md

@@ -0,0 +1,397 @@
+---
+eip: 9999


Suggested change

eip: 9999

eip: 7760

Assigning next sequential EIP/ERC/RIP number.

Please also update the filename.

abcoathup · 2024-08-23T10:44:01Z

ERCS/erc-9999.md

+title: Minimal Upgradeable Proxies
+description: Minimal upgradeable proxies with immutable arguments and support for onchain implementation queries
+author: Atarpara (@Atarpara), JT Riley (@jtriley-eth), xiaobaiskill (@xiaobaiskill), Vectorized (@Vectorized)
+discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/minimal-upgradeable-proxies/20868


Suggested change

discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/minimal-upgradeable-proxies/20868

discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/erc-7760-minimal-upgradeable-proxies/20868

Updated topic title.

The discussions topic can just contain a link to the PR. There isn't a need to replicate the ERC text (as this may differ).

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:37:24Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+
+The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 and RFC 8174.
+
+### Overview


Suggested change

### Overview

### General specifications

xinbenlv

Editorially I think this ERC draft is ready to submit as a Draft status. Whether this is mathematically "minimal", and/or whether the reference implementation is free of bugs or security flaws is up for technical peer reviews, hence the approve.

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:38:34Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+
+### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy
+
+The transparent upgradeable proxy MUST be deployed by a factory that is responsible for authenticating upgrades.


"MUST be deployed by a factory" seems vaguely defined. What do you try to say here? If a proxy was deployed by EOA via a regular contract call, would that EOA be considered a factory?

Ok, i’ll change to RECOMMENDED. The rationale is that a factory will be very helpful in preparing the exact bytecode needed.

An EOA can always deploy the same bytecode in place of the factory, and it will still work properly.

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:40:27Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+
+Emitting the ERC-1967 events during initialization is OPTIONAL. Indexers MUST NOT expect the initialization code to emit the ERC-1967 events.
+
+### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy


Suggested change

### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy

### Basic form of minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:41:03Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+
+As it is beneficial to install the factory at a vanity address with leading zero bytes so that the proxy's bytecode can be optimized to be shorter, variants for 14-byte factory address are provided.
+
+#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (20-byte factory address regular variant)


Suggested change

#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (20-byte factory address regular variant)

#### 20-byte factory address variant of minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:41:23Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+where `________________________________________` is the 20-byte factory address.
+
+
+#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (14-byte factory address regular variant)


Suggested change

#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (14-byte factory address regular variant)

#### 14-byte factory address variant of minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy

Here and below, I think the subsection names of specifications are important as one of the key proposal in this ERC is to propose different forms of minimal proxies. Current naming of these sections are a bit confusing I think, suggest revisit for better readability

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:45:54Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+
+### Transparent upgradeable proxy factory security considerations
+
+The transparent upgradeable proxy factory MUST implement proper access control to allow proxies to be upgraded by only authorized accounts.


MUST is all caps creates a feel like this is still specification because of RFC 2119. It'd suggest you change the tone

Suggested change

The transparent upgradeable proxy factory MUST implement proper access control to allow proxies to be upgraded by only authorized accounts.

To ensure security, the transparent upgradeable proxy factory must implement proper access control to allow proxies to be upgraded by only authorized accounts.

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:46:38Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+
+### Onchain querying of implementation for I-variants
+
+The bytecode of the proxies before any optional immutable arguments MUST be verified with the following steps:


Should these requirements be in the specification section?

Will move to specification section.

xinbenlv · 2024-08-25T21:47:56Z

ERCS/erc-7760.md

+
+## Motivation
+
+Having standardized minimal bytecode for upgradeable proxies enables the following:


Can you provide details about how these bytecodes are generated so people can verify the correctness and minimal-ness?

To the best of our knowledge, the transparent proxy can have 1 opcode shaved off it for its upgrade logic. The rest of the proxies are as minimal as possible, given the constraints of avoiding PUSH0 and optimizing first for runtime gas.

But since it has already been used in the wild, including the version that has been already used is more beneficial than including the theoretically more minimal version. The purpose of this standard is to aid block explorer auto verification. Support for existing proxies outweighs the 2-3 runtime gas saved.

Also, users who want to squeeze out every single bit of runtime gas savings and bytecode size will use the UUPS variant.

Historical context: ERC-1167 was not minimal at the time of finalization. The 0age proxy is more minimal in both runtime gas and bytecode size. But ERC-1167 was chosen as the base for ERC-6551's proxy due to wider support for auto-verification.

With all this in consideration, the transparent variant is minimal-enough.

…orized/ERCs into minimal-upgradeable-proxies

eip-review-bot

All Reviewers Have Approved; Performing Automatic Merge...

Vectorized added 4 commits August 19, 2024 05:07

T

d1b2978

T

9816395

Edit ERC

e4d6588

Edit ERC

8dea3c5

Vectorized requested a review from eip-review-bot as a code owner August 23, 2024 06:28

github-actions bot added c-new s-draft t-erc labels Aug 23, 2024

Vectorized changed the title ~~Add ERC: Minimal upgradeable proxies~~ Add ERC: Minimal Upgradeable Proxies Aug 23, 2024

Add description

eda1119

Edit

e8bac73

eip-review-bot added e-consensus e-review labels Aug 23, 2024

Vectorized added 3 commits August 23, 2024 06:32

Edit

e00c857

Edit

6651f25

Merge branch 'master' into minimal-upgradeable-proxies

ebd7eef

abcoathup reviewed Aug 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

Vectorized added 2 commits August 25, 2024 00:10

Update ERC draft

9b570d6

Edit ERC

d56ef9a

Vectorized requested a review from abcoathup August 25, 2024 00:34

xinbenlv reviewed Aug 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

Vectorized added 3 commits August 26, 2024 01:03

Edit ERC

1729e17

Fix bytecode, add author

5fdbcca

Merge branch 'master' into minimal-upgradeable-proxies

73964b4

Vectorized requested a review from xinbenlv August 26, 2024 16:36

Vectorized added 2 commits August 26, 2024 17:04

Tidy

9f403b2

Merge branch 'minimal-upgradeable-proxies' of https://github.com/Vect…

7714ea5

…orized/ERCs into minimal-upgradeable-proxies

Vectorized added 5 commits August 26, 2024 17:14

Tidy

a7b2a64

Tidy

ec4a412

Tidy

f284a24

Edit ERC

331b42c

Add initialization code rationale

0c1e818

xinbenlv approved these changes Aug 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

eip-review-bot enabled auto-merge (squash) August 27, 2024 02:16

eip-review-bot approved these changes Aug 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

eip-review-bot merged commit 3758136 into ethereum:master Aug 27, 2024
10 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add ERC: Minimal Upgradeable Proxies #604

Add ERC: Minimal Upgradeable Proxies #604

Vectorized commented Aug 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

eip-review-bot commented Aug 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

abcoathup Aug 23, 2024

abcoathup Aug 23, 2024

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

xinbenlv left a comment

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

Vectorized Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

Vectorized Aug 26, 2024

xinbenlv Aug 25, 2024

Vectorized Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

eip-review-bot left a comment

	discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/minimal-upgradeable-proxies/20868
	discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/erc-7760-minimal-upgradeable-proxies/20868


		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 and RFC 8174.

		### Overview


		### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy

		The transparent upgradeable proxy MUST be deployed by a factory that is responsible for authenticating upgrades.


		Emitting the ERC-1967 events during initialization is OPTIONAL. Indexers MUST NOT expect the initialization code to emit the ERC-1967 events.

		### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy

	### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy
	### Basic form of minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy


		As it is beneficial to install the factory at a vanity address with leading zero bytes so that the proxy's bytecode can be optimized to be shorter, variants for 14-byte factory address are provided.

		#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (20-byte factory address regular variant)

	#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (20-byte factory address regular variant)
	#### 20-byte factory address variant of minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy

		where `________________________________________` is the 20-byte factory address.


		#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (14-byte factory address regular variant)

	#### Minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy (14-byte factory address regular variant)
	#### 14-byte factory address variant of minimal ERC-1967 transparent upgradeable proxy


		### Transparent upgradeable proxy factory security considerations

		The transparent upgradeable proxy factory MUST implement proper access control to allow proxies to be upgraded by only authorized accounts.

	The transparent upgradeable proxy factory MUST implement proper access control to allow proxies to be upgraded by only authorized accounts.
	To ensure security, the transparent upgradeable proxy factory must implement proper access control to allow proxies to be upgraded by only authorized accounts.


		### Onchain querying of implementation for I-variants

		The bytecode of the proxies before any optional immutable arguments MUST be verified with the following steps:


		## Motivation

		Having standardized minimal bytecode for upgradeable proxies enables the following:

Add ERC: Minimal Upgradeable Proxies #604

Add ERC: Minimal Upgradeable Proxies #604

Conversation

Vectorized commented Aug 23, 2024 • edited Loading

eip-review-bot commented Aug 23, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

xinbenlv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Vectorized Aug 26, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Vectorized Aug 26, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eip-review-bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Vectorized commented Aug 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

eip-review-bot commented Aug 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Vectorized Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Vectorized Aug 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading