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

HIP 47: Increase DKG Failure Penalty #313

Closed
hiptron opened this issue Nov 13, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

HIP 47: Increase DKG Failure Penalty #313

hiptron opened this issue Nov 13, 2021 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@hiptron
Copy link
Collaborator

hiptron commented Nov 13, 2021

Summary

Increase the DKG penalty amount from the current value of 1.0 to 5.0. The DKG penalty is assessed when a validator fails to complete the distributed key generation (DKG) that is required for a consensus group election to complete. A failed election is reattempted 5 blocks later with another set of validators. Repeated election failures are bad for the network and bad for the validator pool. The current DKG failure penalty amount is not significant enough to drive change in behavior for misconfigured and poor performing validators. By tuning the penalty amount in this way, failed validators should be more quickly removed from eligibility for consensus group and hopefully provide greater incentive for operators to improve the performance of their validators.

Rendered view

https://github.com/helium/HIP/blob/master/0047-increase-dkg-penalty.md

@jamiew
Copy link
Contributor

jamiew commented Nov 22, 2021

There has been nearly universal support for this proposal and it has passed our general standard for rough consensus.

On behalf of the DeWi, the HIP Editors team, and the wider Helium community, I am marking this proposal as approved and recommending that the coredev team implement the necessary changes as soon as reasonably possible.

jamiew added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 22, 2021
jamiew added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 22, 2021
@vincenzospaghetti
Copy link
Contributor

vincenzospaghetti commented Oct 19, 2022

Hi, @PaulVMo looks like this was approved and implemented. I'm going to close this issue. Thanks for your contribution! Congrats!

@PaulVMo
Copy link
Contributor

PaulVMo commented Oct 19, 2022 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants