Add support for Ethereum EIP 1559

[matejcik]

depends on trezor/trezor-firmware#1604, PR trezor/trezor-firmware#1653

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The upcoming Ethereum London hardfork changes fee calculations in a way that is (supposedly) both significantly more favorable to users, and makes it easier to reliably calculate fees for wallets.

Each block has a base fee per gas that a transaction must pay. The fee rate is adjusted per block based on network congestion, similar to Bitcoin difficulty.
The user sets two limits: maximum total fee rate and maximum priority fee rate. From the user's POV this breaks down as follows:

• If your total fee rate is lower than block base rate, you don't get included in the block. Otherwise:
• If your priority rate is lower than block base rate, then block base rate is your final cost (up to your total fee rate).
• Otherwise, your priority rate is your final cost.

It's unclear to me if it makes sense to set the priority rate different from the total fee rate.

See https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1559 for details

Describe the solution you'd like
Suite should fetch the base rate and set the total fee rate and priority fee rate accordingly. Firmware will accept new fields to provide the new values.

[brad-decker]

@matejcik

Just to clarify:

maxFeePerGas - the maximum amount you will pay per gas, inclusive of your priority fee and the base fee of the block.
maxPriorityFeePerGas - The maximum tip that will be paid to the miner to prioritize your transaction above others.

a user could set a really high maxFeePerGas, to ensure that no matter how congested the network their transaction can still be considered. They could also set a maxPriorityFeePerGas of 10 as an example.

So if the block baseFee is 50gwei, the user sets their maxFeePerGas to 100 and maxPriorityFeePerGas at 10 the user will pay 60 gwei per gas (50 for the baseFee and 10 for the tip)

If the network gets suddenly jammed up with txs, the baseFee might rise to 94gwei lets say, in this case the user will pay 100gwei per gas (94 base fee, and then 6 tip to the miner).

--- coincidently after the hard fork gasPrice is inferred as maxFeePerGas for backwards compatibility, as maxPriorityFeePerGas is ♾️

so in the first scenario above where the gasPrice is set as 100 then the user will pay 100 per gas, with 50 being burned and 50 going to the miner as a tip.

[HeroHann]

So I am just a costumer / user, but what I get from the open requests regarding EIP-1559 is, that Trezor does NOT support the optimal fee usage, but still relies on the backward compatibility right? I mean EIP-1559 was known for some time. Any ETA on this?

[mohamedmansour]

Hello! What is still required for EIP-1559 integration into Trezor wallets? Is development help needed since trezor/trezor-firmware#1604 is merged. If there is a detailed plan on what needs to be done, I am willing to spend couple of sprints to develop it

[mysliwiec-tech]

Seems like new firmware has arrived today: https://github.com/trezor/trezor-firmware/blob/master/core/CHANGELOG.md#242-16th-september-2021

[jrm2194]

@mysliwiec-tech Also available for Trezor One? Doesn't seem so :/

[mysliwiec-tech]

@mysliwiec-tech Also available for Trezor One? Doesn't seem so :/

Seems like unfortunately not. Here's why: https://twitter.com/FrederikBolding/status/1438580809582194689?s=19

[sm3434]

So when can we expect support for Trezor one gusys

[facundomedica]

Hello! This is affecting all of Trezor One+Metamask users, which I think we are quite a lot of people.
Is there any ETA or guide on how to transact in the meantime? Thank you!

[facundomedica]

A workaround can be found here: https://twitter.com/benlakoff/status/1441174886114680833
Basically install an older version of Metamask (9.8.4) in Firefox and that's it! Happy transacting while waiting 😄

[facundomedica]

@matejcik I think this issue should have a high priority tag given that Trezor One basically stopped being compatible with the most used wallet (Metamask).

[neokry]

This issue breaks metamask support for trezor one. Seriously need a fix for this soon.

[gliinbox]

This issue breaks metamask support for trezor one. Seriously need a fix for this soon.

Hi Trezor team, seems like alot of comments were deleted yesterday - curious, what was the reason?

I imagine there's a large number of Trezor one users, and metamask/ eth is probably the #1 use case outside of cold storage. I'm curious if this is seen as important for Trezor, if not, why? This way users can prepare for the future by looking at alternatives ...

thanks ya'll - still think ya'll the best hw co out there.

[monomesa]

This issue breaks metamask support for trezor one. Seriously need a fix for this soon.

Hi Trezor team, seems like alot of comments were deleted yesterday - curious, what was the reason?

I imagine there's a large number of Trezor one users, and metamask/ eth is probably the #1 use case outside of cold storage. I'm curious if this is seen as important for Trezor, if not, why? This way users can prepare for the future by looking at alternatives ...

thanks ya'll - still think ya'll the best hw co out there.

It will be good to have clarity here!

[prusnak]

@jrm2194 @sm3434 @facundomedica @neokry @gliinbox @monomesa
We are investigating EIP-1559 for Trezor Model One in trezor/trezor-firmware#1834