cwgoes spec comments
This commit is contained in:
parent
23fe4fab45
commit
02559e725a
|
@ -6,25 +6,27 @@
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Cosmos Hub is a Tendermint-based Delegated Proof of Stake (DPos) blockchain
|
The Cosmos Hub is a Tendermint-based Delegated Proof of Stake (DPos) blockchain
|
||||||
system that serves as a backbone of the Cosmos ecosystem. It is operated and
|
system that serves as a backbone of the Cosmos ecosystem. It is operated and
|
||||||
secured by an open and globally decentralized set of validators. Tendermint
|
secured by an open and globally decentralized set of validators. Tendermint is
|
||||||
consensus is a Byzantine fault-tolerant distributed protocol that involves all
|
a Byzantine fault-tolerant distributed protocol for consensus among distrusting
|
||||||
validators in the process of exchanging protocol messages in the production of
|
parties, in this case the group of validators which produce the blocks for
|
||||||
each block. To avoid Nothing-at-Stake problem, a validator in Tendermint needs
|
cosmos. To avoid the nothing-at-stake problem, a validator in Tendermint needs
|
||||||
to lock up coins in a bond deposit. Tendermint protocol messages are signed by
|
to lock up coins in a bond deposit. Each bond's atoms are illiquid, they cannot
|
||||||
the validator's private key, and this is a basis for Tendermint strict
|
be transferred however they can be unbonded to become liquid, this process
|
||||||
accountability that allows punishing misbehaving validators by slashing
|
takes the unbonding-period which will be 3 weeks by default at Cosmos-Hub
|
||||||
(burning) their bonded Atoms. On the other hand, validators are rewarded for
|
launch. Tendermint protocol messages are signed by the validator's private key,
|
||||||
their service of securing blockchain network by the inflationary provisions and
|
and this is a basis for Tendermint strict accountability that allows punishing
|
||||||
transactions fees. This incentives correct behavior of the validators and
|
misbehaving validators by slashing (burning) their bonded Atoms. On the other
|
||||||
provides the economic security of the network.
|
hand, validators are rewarded for their service of securing blockchain network
|
||||||
|
by the inflationary provisions and transactions fees. This incentivizes correct
|
||||||
|
behavior of the validators and provides the economic security of the network.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The native token of the Cosmos Hub is called Atom; becoming a validator of the
|
The native token of the Cosmos Hub is called the Atom; becoming a validator of the
|
||||||
Cosmos Hub requires holding Atoms. However, not all Atom holders are validators
|
Cosmos Hub requires holding Atoms. However, not all Atom holders are validators
|
||||||
of the Cosmos Hub. More precisely, there is a selection process that determines
|
of the Cosmos Hub. More precisely, there is a selection process that determines
|
||||||
the validator set as a subset of all validators (Atom holders that
|
the validator set as a subset of all validators (Atom holders that
|
||||||
wants to become a validator). The other option for Atom holder is to delegate
|
wants to become a validator). The other option for Atom holder is to delegate
|
||||||
their atoms to validators, i.e., being a delegator. A delegator is an Atom
|
their atoms to validators, i.e., being a delegator. A delegator is an Atom
|
||||||
holder that has bonded its Atoms by delegating it to a validator. By bonding
|
holder that has put its Atoms at stake by delegating it to a validator. By bonding
|
||||||
Atoms to secure the network (and taking a risk of being slashed in case of
|
Atoms to secure the network (and taking a risk of being slashed in case of
|
||||||
misbehaviour), a user is rewarded with inflationary provisions and transaction
|
misbehaviour), a user is rewarded with inflationary provisions and transaction
|
||||||
fees proportional to the amount of its bonded Atoms. The Cosmos Hub is
|
fees proportional to the amount of its bonded Atoms. The Cosmos Hub is
|
||||||
|
|
|
@ -13,15 +13,14 @@ withdraw all fees they are entitled too before they can bond or unbond Atoms.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Because fees are optimized to note
|
Because fees are optimized to note
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Commission on Atom Provisions and having atoms autobonded are mutually exclusive (we can’t have both). The reason
|
Commission on Atom Provisions and having atoms autobonded are mutually
|
||||||
for this is that
|
exclusive (we can’t have both). The reason for this is that if there are atoms
|
||||||
|
commissions and autobonding, the portion of atoms the fee distribution
|
||||||
if there are atoms commissions and autobonding, the portion of
|
calculation would become very large as the atom portion for each delegator
|
||||||
atoms the fee distribution calculation would become very large as the atom
|
would change each block making a withdrawal of fees for a delegator require a
|
||||||
portion for each delegator would change each block making a withdrawal of fees
|
calculation for every single block since the last withdrawal. Conclusion we can
|
||||||
for a delegator require a calculation for every single block since the last
|
only have atom commission and unbonded atoms provisions, or bonded atom
|
||||||
withdrawal. Conclusion we can only have atom commission and unbonded atoms
|
provisions and no atom commission
|
||||||
provisions, or bonded atom provisions and no atom commission
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Fee Calculations
|
## Fee Calculations
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue