Reward SRs with the transaction fees charged for bandwidth and Energy

[renchenchang]

Background:

With the development of the TRON network, the TRON network ecosystem has become increasingly prosperous. At the same time, SR (Super Representatives) also need to consume more resources to maintain the entire network, which includes higher hardware demand and higher maintenance cost. The current rewards given to each SR include 16 TRX for block production and 160 TRX for voting. Compared with other public blockchains, the TRON network currently lacks the mechanism for rewarding SR with transaction fees. The transaction fee of the TRON network is mainly caused by energy and bandwidth consumption. Currently, all the transaction fee is transferred to the black hole account.

Inflation comparison

EOS: 1%
ETH: 4.2%
TRX: 1.6% (without transaction fee reward)
TRX: 1.85%(with transaction fee reward)

TRON inflation is far lower than Ethereum.

Motivation:

In order to further improve the stability and efficiency of the TRON network, it is proposed to increase the rewards for SRs. The transaction fees charged by energy and bandwidth consumption can be rewarded to SR, and they are distributed to voters like rewards for producing block. Transaction fees will increase the enthusiasm of SR to maintain the network. At the same time, the transaction fee mechanism can effectively prevent SR from producing blank blocks that contain 0 transactions.

Present condition of transaction fees

These days, there will be 2,000,000 transactions and $17000 fee every day on average. It means every transaction will cost $0.0085 and SR will be rewarded $0.6 for producing a block if SR can package 70 transactions into a block. If transaction fees increase, the fee reward to SR will be very considerable. On the other hand, transactions will decrease if transaction fees increase. We also analyze transaction value distributions. Take USDT for example, 53.6% of USDT transaction values are more than $100, 28.4% of USDT transaction values are more than $1 and less than 100$, only 18% of USDT transaction values are less than $1. So it has only a little effect on transactions if transaction fees increase.

Reasonable solutions:

Reasonable solutions are as follows:

1. Real-time reward method: Each time the SR produces a block, the transaction fee in the block is rewarded to the SR.
2. Average reward method: After N blocks are produced in the network, the transaction fees in these N blocks are evenly rewarded to SRs, which can prevent SR from only packaging transactions with higher fees.

Note:

For the fees of timeout smart contract transaction, it should continue to transfer them to the black hole account to avoid malicious SRs from deliberately setting the transaction overtime to obtain high fees.

[Imbaexchange]

higher rewards will only dump the price more and more what effect that no one will earn more.

its a simple calculation when you put daily 4.5 million TRX in the Market and the demand is growing low, the price will go down.

ETH show us how it work. high fees, high demand, low inflation. Price go up the community is happy, price go up more.
Now ETH want to go to PoS and reduce the inflation again.

Why not reduce the rewards until there is not more demend. so the price will go up and SR will earn more.

[behilter]

This is attractive for SR, but it is not friendly for ordinary TRX holders.

[tronfamily]

Higher server costs can also be covered by other means. For example, by lowering the rewards to the voters.

A distribution of 80% of the rewards to the voters leaves enough room for a very good node, which costs on average $100 per month. To cover the costs at the current TRX price, a daily rate of block rewards from a single SR is sufficient.

17,066 TRX per day x $0.025 = $426.65 per day.

The proposal is unacceptable for us, because it increases inflation and the gap between SR (1-27) and SRP(28-127) is much wider.

[kunlunxuejue11]

In order to reduce inflation, I would suggest we increase the transaction fee, and this will leads to more TRX burn, would be helpful on inflation.

[Hei-jialun]

I'm afraid the only people who will profit from this proposal are the SR and Justin.

Inflation, which TRON criticizes, will be worse and the interests of a large number of ordinary holders will not be protected.

It is rather shameful for the official to sacrifice the interests of the majority to please SR.

As a TRX holder, we strongly disagree.

[renchenchang]

I'm afraid the only people who will profit from this proposal are the SR and Justin.

Inflation, which TRON criticizes, will be worse and the interests of a large number of ordinary holders will not be protected.

It is rather shameful for the official to sacrifice the interests of the majority to please SR.

As a TRX holder, we strongly disagree.

beside SR, voters can also share the reward

[renchenchang]

Voters can share the transaction fees like reward for voting SR, so I think more voters will freeze TRX to get the reward. Maybe it has no affect on Inflation.

[tronfamily]

What if the nodes only produce money-making transactions and others are thrown back? For example, the transactions created with free bandwidth or energy?

This would result in prioritization or ultimately only TRX burnt transactions. Bandwidth and energy would be discarded.

[Hei-jialun]

Voters can share the transaction fees like reward for voting SR, so I think more voters will freeze TRX to get the reward. Maybe it has no affect on Inflation.

Compared to those who vote to participate, those who don't vote are in the majority. And how do you address the resulting inflation.

[Hei-jialun]

Another questioin:
If SR do something bad, for example, change the code to make smart contract related transactions to timeout, then they can get the fee limit. Is that right?

[behilter]

Voters can share the transaction fees like reward for voting SR, so I think more voters will freeze TRX to get the reward. Maybe it has no affect on Inflation.

Compared to those who vote to participate, those who don't vote are in the majority. And how do you address the resulting inflation.

I can not agree with your more.

[renchenchang]

Another questioin:
If SR do something bad, for example, change the code to make smart contract related transactions to timeout, then they can get the fee limit. Is that right?

For the fees of timeout smart contract transaction, it should continue to transfer them to the black hole account

[ghost]

As an SRP we are against it as it would result in more going to SRs which are largely made up of TRON nodes.

As SRPs we have no chance of ever competing with these nodes we can't afford to "buy a seat". We really want to continue promoting Tron and bringing back the community but it's difficult when we are not making any money to cover costs

[cryptoguyinza]

Hi

Transaction fees are a way to reduce trx supply or slow down the trx supply from increasing. I think keeping this in play is best.

Ideally we would like transactions fee costs to increase a bit more and also bring more use cases so transaction fees hopefully is greater than new trx generated. So I would prefer to not have transaction fees come to SR.

I do not think SR need more rewards at this stage. If we want a SR to spend more on hardware rather try other approaches like

• apply a max share % with voters across all SR on the tron automatic reward collection.
• make block rewards higher, failure to run a good node will mean missed blocks and less rewards

These are some ideas.

[simbadMarino]

If approved that will be unacceptable, TRX burning is giving the price a little bit of hope for investors to be stable in the long term otherwise we are getting diluted even more. Please do not accept this kind of greed and short sighted incentives!! Totally unacceptable!!

[TronSpark]

Problem:
SRs may not put in place the necessary resources to successfully support a robust and growing network.

The root cause of the issue we have is due to the voter reward culture(reward for vote) that is already established. We can't change that. Therefore, increasing overall rewards will not benefit the SR. In fact, we increased rewards from 32 TRX to 176 TRX yet most of that went right back to the community and not the SR. SRs are now making less TRX than they were a year ago. Yet, the resources needed is growing as the network expands. Also, shifting the ratio between block rewards and voter rewards will get much objection from voters. Therefore, we support SR transaction fees as it helps SRs operate reliably without the pressure from voters wanting higher rewards. It is also standard across the industry. There has always been a conflict of interest between network integrity and voter rewards. Nonetheless, the health of the network needs to be kept as a top priority.

Some are worried about devaluation. The inflation we are talking about is not significant. In a growing crypto environment, where we expect the masses to adopt the technology, it should be practically negligible. The onboarding of new customers should very easily overcome this pressure. We went from 32 TRX per block to 176 TRX per block and the TRX price didn't suffer. We do need a robust network if Tron plans to remain a leader.

[simbadMarino]

As a TRX voter and holder I would not care to take a cut in the voting rewards but still consider the fees should go to the burning mechanism. I think most of us will be happy to share some voting rewards to SRs instead of this, fee burning is a direct “reward” for the whole ecosystem as we increase Tron usage and adoption, if you remove that you are killing lots of trust from investors. If current SRs are no longer profitable and cannot find another solution maybe it’s time for new SR to take their place if they can find cheaper and robust solutions for hosting and servers ;)

[ibnzUK]

Possible issue

When there is an application where instant execution time is not required, say order submitted or cancelled on exchange running on Tron. Exchange developers can technically submit those transactions on to blocks they want.
The system could become rigged with some nodes doing more work (for their own benefit) and others do less.

• SR's who redistribute token rewards to voters can adjust their software to only fill blocks with transactions when it is their turn to produce a block. (example)

• Dapp developers could choose to ignore particular nodes or in the worst case, Tron Foundation itself could use their own nodes to do all the work needed.

_

The example below is just a heavy load of transactions in 6 seconds, but when targeted correctly this could be 3 times more rewards for someone.

_

[bondibox]

It has always been my understanding that the inflation caused by SR rewards is temporary, and eventually SR block and voter rewards will be offset entirely by transaction fees, or actually phased out and replaced by the transaction fees. Unfortunately, current TRON blockchain adoption has resulted in transaction fees which are only about 13% of what would be needed to offset inflation.

Currently, the annual rate of inflation for TRX total supply is about 1.85%. This proposal would add to that another 0.25% for a total of 2.1% annual inflation.

I question the necessity of this proposal. The very last elected SR with only 1% of voter rewards will receive 17,067 TRX in block production rewards, and 46,080 TRX in voter rewards. At the current price of TRX that is approximately $1,600 USD per day in SR revenue, and even after sharing 80% of rewards is still left with 12,620 TRX or approximately $328, per day and $9,843 per month. If the OP is unable to run a TRON node for $10k per month, he's doing something wrong.

Finally I come to the crux of my argument. OP says the motivation for this TIP is

In order to further improve the stability and efficiency of the TRON network

but that is not what this TIP will accomplish. If SR's are compensated by the number of transactions that are put into a block, then you can expect SR's to funnel transactions toward their own blocks. An SR who is running a dapp will delay transactions from their dapp until they can be included in their own blocks, or the blocks of SR's they support. This will give rise to cliques and cabals of SR's and dapp developers who withhold transactions from being included in the first available block, and wait for the producers whom they support.

[leenasamme]

who is that asshole posted this proposal, don't face me in front your 32 teeth will be on the road

[KI5FPL]

You should solve the design flaw of TIMEOUT first.
When an SR node is doing GC, with out-dated server, the 50ms timing limit is unfair for dapp users.

Make it a weighted OpCode count solves. Yet you never cares.

[renchenchang]

You should solve the design flaw of TIMEOUT first.
When an SR node is doing GC, with out-dated server, the 50ms timing limit is unfair for dapp users.

Make it a weighted OpCode count solves. Yet you never cares.

unlike ethereum, TRON must produce a block every 3 seconds.

[Btcrabbit]

I will agree with this proposal if the implementation can promise the rewards are divided by all the voters. Right now, many SRs set the dividend ratio to 0 and the voter can not receive any reward from staking the TRX and voting to SR. So, the most important thing is ensuring the reward is not "stolen" by bad SRs.

[tronfamily]

However, this no longer matches the motivation of the TIP but feeds the fear that it only serves to enrich the first 27 SR and their voter.

If one gives the unburned fees as a reward to the SR's and the SR's to their voters, then again nothing remains for the "hardware costs".

[tronfamily]

A proposed solution for cost recovery:

Decoupling the block rewards from the onchain rewards. These would no longer be distributed as rewards and remain with the SR for the corresponding hardware costs.
So the scissors will close a little between 1-27 and 28-127. If the SR distributes the block rewards to the voters, it is his own fault.

The fees will still be burned and the problem solved.

[renchenchang]

A proposed solution for cost recovery:

Decoupling the block rewards from the onchain rewards. These would no longer be distributed as rewards and remain with the SR for the corresponding hardware costs.
So the scissors will close a little between 1-27 and 28-127. If the SR distributes the block rewards to the voters, it is his own fault.

The fees will still be burned and the problem solved.

Could you explain in detail?

[tronfamily]

Total Votes Network: 24,697,752,750

Vote-Reward-Pool
4,608,000 TRX / 24,697,752,750 = 0,000186575 TRX per Vote

Block-Reward-Pool
460,800 TRX / 27 = 17066,67 TRX

Daily values

Calculation Total Rewards of an SR with 350,000,000 Votes

Vote Rewards = 350,000,000 * 0.000186575 TRX = 65,301.25 TRX
Block Rewards = 17,066 TRX
Total Rewards = 82,367 TRX

Example SR with 350,000,000 votes (with 90% onchain rewards actual)

82,367 TRX / 100 * 90 = 74,130.525 TRX (to the voters)
Total SR-Income: 8,236.475 TRX

Example SR with 350,000,000 votes (90% onchain rewards with excluded blockrewards)

65,301.25 TRX / 100 * 90 = 58,771.125 TRX (to the voters)

Vote Rewards: 65,301.25 TRX - 58,771.125 TRX = 6,530.125 TRX
Block Rewards: 17,066 TRX
Total SR-Income: 23,596.125 TRX

Overview:

Income with onchain Blockrewards : 8,236 TRX
Income without onchain Blockrewards:23,596 TRX

[bondibox]

Right now, many SRs set the dividend ratio to 0 and the voter can not receive any reward from staking the TRX and voting to SR.

If an SR has a 0 payout then vote for a different SR.

[Omo-Coc]

This proposal will promote more users to freeze and vote in a short time, and more freeze will be more helpful to maintain the currency price

[tronfamily]

Can you explain why more people freeze and vote through this proposal?

[joker-gdb]

From the current transaction cost statistics, the impact on inflation is not big，So I think we should not argue about inflation, mainly whether there is a possibility of evil in SR， If there is no possibility, I think this proposal is ok

[MishaLederman]

Here are Klever.io’s thoughts and ideas regarding the proposal.

Let’s start deconstructing arguments to see how efficient this proposal would be:
1 - Background
Does maintaining the entire network demands lead to higher hardware demand? Yes.
Is the current rewards enough to pay for those cutting edge hardware? Yes, it is more than enough to maintain several nodes.
So, why more rewards? Apparently the cost of hardware has no relation with redirect TX fees to SR block production.
Does other blockchain include TX fees as block production rewards? Yes, but some have fixed max supply (Tron does not), and do we need to do the same thing as others?

2 - Inflation comparison
Is inflation far lower than Ethereum? Yes. Do we need to compare to others again? Why not compare with EOS which already have inflation lower than tron? Ok, Ethereum is a top 2 market cap, but its a 5+ year old blockchain.

3 - Motivation
Does more rewards, or TX fees to SRs, improve the stability and efficiency of the network? We don’t see any direct relation with it. Code/Protocol improvement would be a better option for those topics
Transaction fees will increase the enthusiasm of SR to maintain the network!!! Ok, this is possible. We’re sure higher TRX value would also cause the same enthusiasm.
If TX fees also goes to voters sharing ratio, how would it improve the capacity of SRs to apply better hardware (not that they need that, but its in the background argument)
TX fee mechanism can effectively prevent SR from producing blank blocks that contain 0 transactions? There are many other ways to effectively prevent this, like SLASH bad SRs, we have been putting this option at SRs/Developers meeting for more than a year now.

4 - Present condition of transaction fees
Transaction fees increase only has a little effect on transactions? This is strange, what does Transaction fees increase have to do with the topic in discussion? The proposal is to redirect transactions Fees, not to increase.... Either way... the statement is true for USDT, but MOST of Tron’s transactions is much lower than $1, USDT example is misleading the statement.

5 - Reasonable solutions
1 - One should be able to pick the best transaction based on the fee to pack, which is not good in Tron’s model. Also, dapps and exchanges would be able to sync TX with predicted slot time to gain higher rewards
2 - Maybe the best option, but then... the argument of bad SRs with 0 transaction in block will break... those will also receive TX fees even if node is not good enough to produce blocks with transactions
Extra: Its been said in discussions that higher rewards would attract more frozen TRX... Its possible, but what is the gain? Right now exchanges have higher staking participation ,and holders can still dump price in exchanges and receive the sharing rewards... This is likely what we have seen over recent period.

[a49688448]

I'm curious that who will benefit from this？

[joker-gdb]

I'm curious that who will benefit from this？

I think SR will be the direct beneficiary, but SR will need to hold trx for a long time. The province bears the risk of trx price fluctuations, and it should increase their income.

[a49688448]

I'm curious that who will benefit from this？

I think SR will be the direct beneficiary, but SR will need to hold trx for a long time. The province bears the risk of trx price fluctuations, and it should increase their income.

I have nothing to do with it as I am not a SR.

[joker-gdb]

I'm curious that who will benefit from this？

I think SR will be the direct beneficiary, but SR will need to hold trx for a long time. The province bears the risk of trx price fluctuations, and it should increase their income.

I have nothing to do with it as I am not a SR.

Voters will also be given rewards, and you will also get benefits, you can see the introduction in Motivation. May be prorated to sr voters

[a49688448]

I'm curious that who will benefit from this？

I think SR will be the direct beneficiary, but SR will need to hold trx for a long time. The province bears the risk of trx price fluctuations, and it should increase their income.

I have nothing to do with it as I am not a SR.

Voters will also be given rewards, and you will also get benefits, you can see the introduction in Motivation. May be prorated to sr voters

Yeah. It does attract more people to vote and freeze TRX for rewards.

[liankuaiZyumingfit]

Looks cool～

[ghost]

If this is to be spread amongst the 127 SR / SRP then it could be a good thing and would encourage competition but if it is just the 27 SRs (which the majority are Tron owned nodes) then it just gives more reason for Tron to just buy every SR place

[Omo-Coc]

Rewards can be distributed to voters, this is a very good change

[tronfamily]

I don't know why they write that the voters benefit. Wasn't this TIP about covering the cost of the node and infrastructure?

So not after all? It seems that it is not yet clear what the purpose is.

For anyone who wants to see a preview of what this will look like in the end, feel free to take a look here: https://tron-radar.de/profit.html.

You will quickly notice that this has nothing to do with covering costs. It's all about profits.

Only SR 1-27 will profit from this proposal, the others will lose more. Who will take these places in the future should be clear to everyone.

[kunlunxuejue11]

I don't know why they write that the voters benefit. Wasn't this TIP about covering the cost of the node and infrastructure?

So not after all? It seems that it is not yet clear what the purpose is.

For anyone who wants to see a preview of what this will look like in the end, feel free to take a look here: https://tron-radar.de/profit.html.

You will quickly notice that this has nothing to do with covering costs. It's all about profits.

Only SR 1-27 will profit from this proposal, the others will lose more. Who will take these places in the future should be clear to everyone.

I think their purpose is to promote more people to freeze trx

[bondibox]

I think their purpose is to promote more people to freeze trx

But to what end? They say it's for stability and governance blah blah blah. But the vast majority of frozen TRX is coming from exchanges and TRON / Justin - are they really worried about stability and governance? Is there any possible way someone could install 19 SR's to overtake consensus? Is there any way a proposal can pass without being promoted by TRON & Justin? I think this line that more freezing is essential to TRON stability is just more s-- they are throwing at the wall to see what sticks, just like paying for hardware or rewarding the voters. Just more gaslighting from TRON.

[GitHub-pepe]

Reward SRs with the transaction fees charged for bandwidth and Energy #196

[tomasvalero]

It is true that SRs should make profitable production costs per block, but the solution being promoted makes the continuous burning of coins impossible.
In fact, if there were a continuous burning, above production, it would objectively imply a rise in the price of Trx and the SRs could be paid for with the current reward system. On the other hand, an inflationary increase could cause massive sales of Trx, falling its price and that not even the increased rewards could cover the costs of the SRs.
Perhaps an increase in rewards per block creation and a small increase in transaction fees on the blockchain would be more appropriate than the solution presented here.

[sean-liu55]

https://github.com/tronprotocol/tips/blob/master/tip-196.md

[kromulan]

SR's do not require more rewards. If current rewards are not enough to run infrastructure, you are doing something wrong.

[vantwoutmaarten]

How can I see if there are SR's voting for this? Because I want to withdraw my votes for them. I have a lot of votes so someone please let me know?

It's just greedy shortsighted SR's that want this. This will not benefit them in the end.

[vantwoutmaarten]

I'm afraid the only people who will profit from this proposal are the SR and Justin.

Inflation, which TRON criticizes, will be worse and the interests of a large number of ordinary holders will not be protected.

It is rather shameful for the official to sacrifice the interests of the majority to please SR.

As a TRX holder, we strongly disagree.

Justin is against this.

[bibobode]

Take a look at Nano for ideas - it has a feeless network, instant transactions, decentralized, and has been running since 2015.

[bondibox]

If you believe Justin is against this then you have been selected to send up to 100 BTC to the following address and I will send back DOUBLE what you sent me...

Are we really supposed to believe that Tron Foundation slipped in tests like
"Test deploy contract with energy fee to sr"
"trans with multi sign and fee to sr"
"Test create account with netFee to sr"

and a parameter getAllowTransactionFeePool

And this was all against Justin's wishes? Or it was unbeknownst to him? Great. Either he's gaslighting us, or the company he's running has gone rogue.