EIPsInsight

Loading Experience

Preparing your insights...

Loading0%
ACDC2026-06-25_181

AllCoreDevs — Consensus #181

2026-06-25 3 decisions 363 transcript lines

Transcript

Ask about this call

Answered from this call's summary and transcript only.

AI-generated — verify against the recording.

Call summary

Targets
  • glamsterdam-devnet-7 launch — ~2–3 weeks out (mid-July 2026) — 00:10:42
  • EIP-8282 external audit — post devnet-7, ~end of July 2026 — 00:47:03
Decisions
  • EIP-7688 (progressive containers) targeted for devnet-7; not DFI'd; revisit if devnet-6 instability warrants it — 00:34:04
  • EIP-8080 (consolidation-based exits) DFI'd from Glamsterdam; authors may re-propose for Hegota — 00:36:07
  • ePBS circuit breakers should track missing payloads (not beacon blocks); no standardization required, client-specific implementations acceptable — 00:17:01
Highlights
  • Client Updates:
    • ·ePBS circuit breakers: Prysm uses consensus-block-based breaker (acknowledged as incorrect for ePBS); needs updating to track missing payloads, not beacon blocks — 00:14:46
  • Organizational:
    • ·Lucid (encrypted mempool EIP-8184) seeking CL spec guidance; Justin Traglia volunteered to help Besu team — 00:50:27
    • ·Glamsterdam mascot vote open; voting closes July 8 — 00:51:37
  • Testing Progress:
    • ·Pre-fork slashing test planned on devnet-6 just before Gloas fork activation — 00:09:20
    • ·EIP-8282 contract constants under discussion: target=8, max=64 preferred over current 32/256; reduces builder withdrawability delay — 00:44:04
  • Fork Status And Schedule:
    • ·glamsterdam-devnet-6 launched hours ago; Gloas fork in ~40 min; EL: Besu, ethrex, Geth; CL: all except Teku — 00:07:25
    • ·glamsterdam-devnet-5 stable for 3 weeks; Lighthouse range-sync bug outstanding; Prysm peering bug resolved — 00:07:33
    • ·Spec bug (consensus-specs #5399) confirmed valid by Terrence; patch targeting devnet-7 — 00:10:24
  • Eip Proposals Glamsterdam:
    • ·EIP-7688 (progressive containers): 3 clients yes (Nimbus, Lodestar, Lighthouse), 3 maybe (Prysm, Teku, Grandine); targeting devnet-7; DFI deferred — 00:26:52
    • ·EIP-8080 (consolidation exit mechanism): DFI'd; authors encouraged to re-propose for Hegota — 00:35:14
    • ·EIP-8282 (builder execution requests): old contract on devnet-6 for workflow testing; updated contract (fee-per-enqueue) targets devnet-7; external audit post-devnet-7 (~end of July) — 00:42:34
Action Items
  • All CL client teams — Review and approve Beacon API PRs (608, 580, 606, 621) by ACDT — 00:19:28
  • Nico Flaig / EIP-8282 authors — Open PR against sys-asm repo for EIP-8282 contract constants (target=8, max=64); signal when contract is final for audit scheduling — 00:47:00

Meeting chat217

  • Kalo | Obol

    gm

  • Iván | ethrex

    gm

  • Barnabas

    https://dora.glamsterdam-devnet-6.ethpandaops.io

  • Barnabas

    https://notes.ethereum.org/@ethpandaops/glamsterdam-devnet-6

  • Justin Traglia

    Reacted to "https://dora.glamste..." with 🔥

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    Whcih clients?

  • Iván | ethrex

    Reacted to "https://dora.glamste..." with 🔥

  • Stefan Starflinger

    Reacted to "https://dora.glamste..." with 🔥

  • Justin Traglia

    Are there slashed validators?

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "https://dora.glamste..." with 🔥

  • Justin Traglia

    Awesome.

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/issues/5399

  • terence

    Ya it’s valid

  • Barnabas

    We also have spamming and fuzzing and blobs as well.

  • terence

    We’ll fix it for devnet7

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "We’ll fix it for devnet7" with 👍

  • Barnabas

    alpha 12 ftw

  • Dima Gusakov | Lido

    Let’s include 7688!

  • Stefan Starflinger

    Reacted to "Let’s include 7688!" with 👍

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://github.com/ethereum/builder-specs/pull/162

  • cayman

    Reacted to "Let’s include 7688!" with 👍

  • Dustin

    Reacted to "Let’s include 768..." with 👍

  • Nico Flaig

    Replying to "https://github.com/e..." default should be to keep it if there is no one pushing for removal

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "Let’s include 7688!" with 👍

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "Let’s include 7688!" with 👍

  • terence

    Yes, keeping it is fine

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "default should be to keep it if there is no one pushing for removal" with 👍

  • Barnabas

    Circuit breakers should be client specific imo

  • terence

    We haven’t even thought about circuit breaker yet

  • Justin Traglia

    I vote to leave flexible.

  • Enrico Del Fante (tbenr)

    We haven’t. But I believe we should some common baseline...

  • terence

    It’s the same as default today

  • Justin Traglia

    Reacted to "We haven’t. But I be..." with 👍

  • terence

    Ya. Same as today

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    We haven’t implemented circuit breakers yet

  • Enrico Del Fante (tbenr)

    I won’t 🙂

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    -10 crop$

  • Barnabas

    maybe we could have a circuitbreaker breakout 😂

  • Dustin

    it's different than pre-ePBS because consensus chain doesn't break

  • Dustin

    it's not "fragile" in the same way

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Reacted to "it's not "fragile" in the same way" with 👍

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "it's not "fragile" in the same way" with 👍

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://github.com/ethereum/builder-specs/pull/138

  • Enrico Del Fante (tbenr)

    Reacted to "it's not "fragile" i..." with 👍

  • Barnabas

    prysm is the only client that has anything afaik

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/608

  • Barnabas

    lgtm sendit

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    yes

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "yes" with 🔥

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/618

  • james

    Have not had the chance to do it yet

  • Justin Traglia

    Replying to "https://github.com/e..." Ah the agenda has a wrong link to this btw

  • Justin Traglia

    Replying to "https://github.com/e..." It was linking to call notes from 4 years ago 🙂

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/606

  • nixo

    Reacted to "It was linking to call notes from 4 years ago 🙂" with 😅

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "It was linking to call notes from 4 years ago 🙂" with 😅

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    Reacted to "It was linking to ca..." with 😅

  • Jun Song

    Reacted to "https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/606" with 👍

  • Barnabas

    teku seems to have merged it in already

  • Barnabas

    so thats great

  • Barnabas

    Replying to "teku seems to have m..." https://github.com/Consensys/teku/pull/10867

  • Barnabas

    extend with optional

  • james

    https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/580

  • james

    This one

  • Barnabas

    we need that tested asap i agree

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/621 Another one that I think would be good to get in

  • Barnabas

    all beacon api prs needs to be merged by ACDT 😂

  • pk910

    I think we should merge it. the endpoints are already in use

  • Jun Song

    Reacted to "I think we should merge it. the endpoints are already in use" with 👍

  • Barnabas

    I’m gonna block dora page for devnet 6 till beacon api prs are not merged

  • Jun Song

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block dora page for devnet 6 till beacon api prs are not merged" with 😂

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "I think we should merge it. the endpoints are already in use" with 👍

  • Kalo | Obol

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block dora..." with 😂

  • Enrico Del Fante (tbenr)

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block dora..." with 🥹

  • pk910

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block dora..." with 😂

  • Justin Traglia

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block dora..." with 😂

  • Satyajit

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block d..." with 😂

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    lgtm

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block dora..." with 😂

  • bfqm

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block d..." with 😂

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://forkcast.org/eips/7688/

  • Barnabas

    SFI decision will have to wait till implementations are done, and its running fine on a devnet.

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "SFI decision will ha..." with ❤️

  • cayman

    Lodestar has an implementation

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "Lodestar has an implementation" with 🔥

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Nimbus has an implementation

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    Lighthouse has an implementation

  • saulius

    Grandine doesn't have implementation.

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "Nimbus has an implementation" with 🔥

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "Lighthouse has an implementation" with 🔥

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    If we put more work on the cl, we can start on frames for the el already

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    Reacted to "If we put more work ..." with 😂

  • Barnabas

    Replying to "If we put more work ..." most of the cls are already on the devnet, and we had to delay launch of the devnet due to el’s not being ready just fyi

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Replying to "If we put more work ..." The thing is this EIP solves the 8192 deposit overflow issue as well

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Replying to "If we put more work ..." SSZ frames!

  • Justin Traglia

    Reacted to "most of the cls are ..." with 🌶️

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "Lighthouse has an im..." with 🔥

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "Nimbus has an implem..." with 🔥

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "Lodestar has an impl..." with 🔥

  • Dustin

    Replying to "If we put more wor..." Also two ELs have kept doing fake invalids, through the last week or so

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    Replying to "If we put more work ..." The deposit cap point can be ignored

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    Because the constant could just be raised too, super simple with 8282. What this eip solves is stable 4788 proofs

  • Greg K | Lido

    Reacted to "If we put more wor..." with 🤔

  • Barnabas

    sounds like most clients are almost there tho, would be a waste to let it all go now.

  • Dima Gusakov | Lido

    Reacted to "sounds like most cli..." with 👍

  • kasey

    Reacted to "sounds like most clients are almost there tho, would be a waste to let it all go now." with 👍

  • Satyajit

    Reacted to "sounds like most c..." with 👍

  • cayman

    Reacted to "sounds like most cli..." with 👍

  • kasey

    When is devnet-7?

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    when is devnet 7 expected?

  • Barnabas

    devnet 7 launch date estimated in 2/3 w

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    From Nimbus side OK

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "I’m gonna block dora..." with 😂

  • cayman

    Lodestar yes

  • Dustin

    Reacted to "sounds like most c..." with 👍

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "Lodestar has an impl..." with 🔥

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "Nimbus has an implem..." with 🔥

  • kasey

    3 weeks is better than 2 haha, it’s close but possible

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "Lighthouse has an im..." with 🔥

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    Lighthouse yes

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "3 weeks is better than 2 haha, it’s close but possible" with 😂

  • Barnabas

    Reacted to "Lighthouse yes" with 😂

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "3 weeks is better th..." with 😂

  • Nico Flaig

    no beacon-api merges until 7688 is in a devnet, deal?

  • Barnabas

    We don’t need all clients for genesis for devnet 7

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "sounds like most cli..." with 😂

  • cayman

    Reacted to "no beacon-api merges..." with 😆

  • Etan (Nimbus)

    Reacted to "We don’t need all cl..." with 🎉

  • Eitan Seri-Levi

    Reacted to "no beacon-api merges..." with 😆

  • saulius

    Grandine maybe, it really depends if there will be left enough of time after ePBS works.

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Reacted to "Grandine maybe, it really depends if there will be left enough of time after ePBS works." with 👍

  • kasey

    IMO if it doesn’t go into devnet-7 it should be in devnet-8, I’m against DFI

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-8080

  • Greg K | Lido

    May I ask why to DFI?

  • Dima Gusakov | Lido

    But it is good for ETH in general

  • Greg K | Lido

    Reacted to "But it is good for..." with 👍

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    Just don't exit

  • Justin Florentine (Besu)

    it limits consolidation agility

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Reacted to "Just don't exit" with 🥲

  • Justin Traglia

    Reacted to "Just don't exit" with 😄

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Reacted to "Just don't exit" with 😄

  • Chris Berry

    Reacted to "it limits consolidat..." with 👍

  • Louis

    Reacted to "Just don't exit" with 😄

  • Kalo | Obol

    Reacted to "Just don't exit" with 😄

  • Justin Florentine (Besu)

    Replying to "Just don't exit" 33% of eth is staked. hold my beer

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Reacted to "33% of eth is staked. hold my beer" with 🤪

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    In my opinion we should not waste complexity for this "gap". It's just not important imho

  • Greg K | Lido

    Isn't it important allowing entities to cheat and exit faster than everyone else?

  • Greg K | Lido

    Especially when some of them create a product out of it

  • terence

    Replying to "In my opinion we sho..." I tend to agree with this. We should do only if it’s a “strong must have”. But ill leave this decision to whether that’s true

  • Francesco

    I can repropose but I am not going to champion the EIP, if someone wants to do it go ahead

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-8045

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    If clients have not looked into it at all we should dfi it

  • Nico Flaig

    it's on devnet-6 already

  • Nico Flaig

    5*

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip-8282-builder-execution-requests/28699

  • terence

    We do need to slash validators on devnet5 right

  • Dima Gusakov | Lido

    Replying to "We do need to slash ..." There are a few slashed on devote-6

  • Dima Gusakov | Lido

    Replying to "We do need to slash ..." So it will be tested there

  • Francesco

    Re: 8080, iirc this was discussed at interop mainly. The call transcripts have essentially nothing about it

  • Justin Traglia

    I support setting target=8, max=64.

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    Sounds like a good trade off

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Replying to "Re: 8080, iirc this ..." Thank you! I was just frantically searching where that was too

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Replying to "Re: 8080, iirc this ..." We can prep some doc indicating the issues then by next acd

  • Kevaundray Wedderburn

    Do we have a date for when we want to freeze changes and then start/finish external audits for 8282?

  • cayman

    Reacted to "I support setting ta..." with 👍

  • Barnabas

    it would be 3 constants?

  • Justin Traglia

    Replying to "it would be 3 consta..." The 3rd one is in the consensus-specs.

  • Barnabas

    Replying to "Do we have a date fo..." post devnet 7 for sure

  • Barnabas

    Replying to "Do we have a date fo..." so probably end of Jul

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "The 3rd one is in th..." with 👍

  • Kevaundray Wedderburn

    Reacted to "so probably end of J..." with 👍

  • Nico Flaig

    Replying to "it would be 3 consta..." https://github.com/ethereum/sys-asm/pull/43#discussion_r3470524501 comment related to what I meant

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    Sounds a but brittle tbh

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    I would rather replace the contract

  • Barnabas

    maybe pr against the sys contract repo?

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    How often do we expect a single builder to deposit?

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    Reacted to maybe pr against the... with "👍"

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    64 sounds like more than enough

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "I support setting ta..." with 👍

  • Justin Traglia

    Replying to "Sounds a but brittle..." My opinion is that dynamic limits are probably not necessary. I think it’s unlikely that we’ll change them later. It just took us a while to decide on the values.

  • Justin Traglia

    Reacted to "64 sounds like more ..." with 👍

  • Nico Flaig

    Replying to "64 sounds like more ..." to be clear that's the max, the target=8, but the expected rate of builder deposits in the normal case is likely far below 1 per payload

  • Justin Florentine (Besu)

    LUCID needs CL oversight!

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    Replying to "64 sounds like more ..." Right. I think that's fine

  • Barnabas

    Devnet 7 spec sheet is up: https://notes.ethereum.org/@ethpandaops/glamsterdam-devnet-7

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    Replying to "64 sounds like more ..." Maybe we could set the target to idk 16 or 32. What matters is that it's capped

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/mascot-needed-for-glamsterdam-upgrade-voting-closes-july-8/26008

  • Barnabas

    POLAR BEARS MUST WIN

  • nixo

    flamingo winning right now, polar bear second in lead

  • Toni Wahrstätter

    Polar bear!

  • Luca | Vero

    Reacted to "https://ethereum-mag..." with 🦫

  • Iván | ethrex

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Satyajit

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST W..." with 🔥

  • nixo

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 💯

  • Satyajit

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST W..." with 🐻❄️

  • nixo

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Satyajit

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST W..." with 💯

  • Mehdi Aouadi

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 💯

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 🐻‍❄️

  • bfqm

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST W..." with 💯

  • Parithosh Jayanthi

    Reacted to "flamingo winning right now, polar bear second in lead" with ❤️

  • Justin Florentine (Besu)

    where my hamsters at?

  • Francesco

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Enrico Del Fante (tbenr)

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Marius Van Der Wijden (M)

    I don't like people offering money on acd tbh

  • NC

    Reacted to POLAR BEARS MUST WIN with "🐻‍❄️"

  • danceratopz

    Reacted to "Polar bear!" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Barnabas

    Replying to "where my hamsters at..." polar bears ate them

  • Nico Flaig

    Replying to "64 sounds like more ..." no, you want it lower to not be able to dos the validator sweep

  • Daniel Knopik

    Reacted to "I don't like peopl..." with 👍

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Satyajit

    Reacted to "Polar bear!" with 🐻❄️

  • Stefan Starflinger

    Reacted to "POLAR BEARS MUST WIN" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Nico Flaig

    Reacted to "Polar bear!" with 🐻‍❄️

  • Kalo | Obol

    Reacted to "I don't like people ..." with 👍

  • Justin Traglia

    Reacted to "no, you want it lowe..." with 👍

Key decisions

  • EIP-7688 (progressive containers) targeted for devnet-7; not DFI'd; revisit if devnet-6 instability warrants it

    devnet-7
  • EIP-8080 (consolidation-based exits) DFI'd from Glamsterdam; authors may re-propose for Hegota

    DFI
  • ePBS circuit breakers should track missing payloads (not beacon blocks); no standardization required, client-specific implementations acceptable

EIPs discussed