Over the last few months, Commit-Boost has been in development. We are targeting production-ready + audit by the end of October and have been engaged with multiple operators (both that are part of the Lido operator set and outside of the Lido operator set) for testing. We are asking more teams to test for feedback and to ensure Commit-Boost has been designed without unknown limitations across Lido’s NOs. This request is scoped to Commit-Boost + the PBS module and follow-on requests for other module testing will be posted on the Lido Community Research Forum.
Below is the information requested in the PERCH post. If more details are needed or other formats are preferred, please let us know.
Details of Request for Testing
Number of Participants: We request at least 10 different NOs with a total of 50,000 validators in Holesky to start testing Commit-Boost and the PBS module
Software and/or protocols to be used: Commit-Boost is the software with the repo here, documentation on testing here, and documentation to learn more can be found here. Please start by testing just the PBS module
Networks: Holesky
Duration: A few weeks
Expected Impact: Teams will need to change their / add a sidecar to be Commit-Boost as outlined in the documentation. Please note we also have tools / support different configurations, e.g. docker, native binaries, and k8s to help streamline deployment. The current testing should allow for backward compatibility (i.e. same / better functionality than just running MEV-Boost) and give NOs more modularity / insight to reduce risks and improve their operations
Requirements:
Alignment with Ethereum Roadmap: Commit-Boost directly aligns with Etheruem’s roadmap with modules that are being created around inclusion lists (censorship resistance) and preconfirmations (scaling). We have also designed Commit-Boost to reduce fragmentation risks to Ethereum and its operator set and not limit who can participate and build Validator Services
Neutrality and Inclusivity: Commit-Boost is designed to not limit any innovation around Validator Services and is built to decrease risks for Ethereum and improve safety mechanisms for Lido / Ethereum’s NOs
Adherence to Community Standards: We have started holding Community calls to hear any concerns / drive consensus around anything contentious and have been working with both validators and module creators to design Commit-Boost from day one. We have also been engaged with the broader Ethereum community for research, design, feedback, and testing around any standards we may support
Security Best Practices: This project is open source with the code being broadly engaged by the community with many eyes and different perspectives across teams during the research, design, and feedback / testing phase. We are also getting Commit-Boost + PBS audited by one of the top audit firms in the space
Complementary Use Cases: Commit-Boost is designed to be one sidecar with the opportunity for validators to opt into many commitments. We expect things like preconfirmations and inclusion lists to flourish and many other commitments / validator services to compliment each other
Please let us know if there are any questions or concerns or anything we can help with and we appreciate the NOs of the Lido Community helping to test Commit-Boost.
Thank you for your efforts and the detailed information in your post.
Stakely is currently operating Commit-Boost for 2800 Lido validators in Holesky. Currently, we are running Commit-Boost in the same way to how we used MEV-Boost, by replacing the latter with Commit-Boost. We have started testing PBS with Stakely validators in Holesky and we intend to connect the Bolt and ETHGas modules with Commit-Boost in Holesky.
Hi from Chorus One.
We have extensively tested every instance of commit-boost since the Helder testnet this June, incl. on Holesky. Separately, we also ran commit-boost on mainnet during the November Devcon preconf pilot.
We take a data-first approach, and have collected extensive internal performance metrics on commit-boost, which we will publicly present on an upcoming commit-boost community call, on December 11th.
Our overall impression is that commit-boost is highly stable, technically mature, and managed in a transparent- and value-aligned way.
Given our data, we expect commit-boost to meaningfully extend validator agency, drastically reduces the risk surface of multiple sidecars, and improve performance across the board.
We’ve been similarly testing on Holesky at scale on about 50 000 validators (non-lido keys) without noticeable issues so far (PBS), we are confident we can gradually ramp it up in mainnet once we have a go (we’ll likely do it on our non-Lido keys anyways).
As highlighted by Chorus One, we are also really happy with the transparent process and discussions around it, and thankful to the team working behind it.
We think the project is important as pre-confirmations will come up with multiple sidecars and flavors, having them designed in a similar fashion so that they can be operated/ in the same way/packaged as one unit will benefit everyone on the staking landscape.
Also sharing on Everstake progress. We are currently conducting extensive testing and have observed the following.
As mev-boost lacks sufficient metrics and does not offer the flexibility we require, we do believe commit-boost is currently the best candidate for replacement. The commit-boost team has been highly responsive and transparent throughout our interactions.
To facilitate the transition from mev-boost to commit-boost, we are collaborating on the following issues:
We are currently running a small mainnet setup with Commit-Boost and the PBS module in place, experimenting with timing games. So far, it has been running smoothly, and we’re seeing promising results. The setup process is very easy now, allowing different modules do just plug in, which in our perspective accelerates further innovative cases in this area. It’s running very stable since day one.
We appreciate the efforts behind Commit-Boost and the transparency in the discussions surrounding it. Looking forward to further developments and happy to support the initiative.
Over the past few months, we’ve been actively participating in commit-boost as one of its operators, including work on the Helder testnet and mainnet Preconf.
As an APAC-based operator, we occasionally encounter network latency with relays. Because of this, we take a more cautious approach when introducing new components, conducting thorough technical reviews and extended testing. So far, the commit-boost project has run smoothly without any issues on our end.
We hold our collaboration with Lido in very high regard and look forward to engaging in discussions and contributing to the process together.