Connect with us


Ethereum [ETH] Ropsten Constantinople hard fork issues unveiled by core developer

Ajay Narayan



Ethereum [ETH] Ropsten Constantinople hard fork issues unveiled by core developer
Source: Unsplash

Recently, Lane Rettig, an independent core developer of Ethereum [ETH] posted a “post-mortem” report and his concerns regarding the Constantinople hard fork on Ropsten Testnet. The report covered the various issues discovered during the hard fork, which was set to be implemented by the end of October 2018.

According to the report, a consensus bug was discovered in Parity implementation of Ethereum. He explained the reasons why the bug was not discovered by the Ethereum testers and why the consensus bug occurred. Rettig added:

“Apparently, in this case, there was some confusion over the meaning of terms like ‘transaction’ and ‘execution frame’ that may have contributed to the bug.”

In addition, there were concerns regarding the absence of miners on Parity, Geth, or Aleth for Ropsten. During that timeframe, Afri Schoedon, a developer posted a Tweet asking for miners to reach out to run mining hashrate on Parity 2.0.7, 2.1.2 or Geth 1.8.17 “configured for Ropsten”.

Rettig opined that there had to be a better understanding and control over mining on a Proof-of-Work [PoW] Testnet. He further stated that Parity had a limit on “how far back nodes could automatically reorganize themselves”. This was because the fork was too long for Parity Ethereum nodes, as stated by Afri Schoedon.

Rettig added that understanding this mechanism was important as Parity has the limit, which is absent in Geth. Furthermore, Geth had a debug.setHead command which allowed users to manually force it onto the right chain whereas Parity did not have any such feature. He added:

“Is this supposed to be a limit on ‘on chain governance’ [allowing nodes to automatically come to consensus on the canonical chain] that triggers the need for meatspace/developer intervention? Or is it more about resource constraints? What’s the limit and why is it set as such?”

He added:

“It’s possible for an upgraded node in fast sync mode (geth or parity, I believe) to fast sync over a bad block which caused a fork and keep following the wrong chain. This is clearly the shortcoming for fast sync but we should discuss this in the context of forks and long reorgs…”

Furthermore, Rettig stated that Ropsten currently has four chains and that it is very difficult for a node to sync from scratch in order to find the right chain. This is due to the peering process occurring on the wrong chain. He stated:

“In this case, it was necessary for nodes to turn off discovery entirely and manually enter a set of peers to get caught up to the right chain”

Another concern raised by Rettig was that the AllCoreDevs channel on Gitter served as the primary means of communication throughout the hard fork but this was disorganized and had no threading. It was further difficult to find a canonical source of information.

According to Rettig, it was necessary to create a core developer “War Room” where this information could be managed during an upgrade or any other emergent situation.

He also stated that since the launch of Constantinople hard fork on Ropsten Testnet till press time, Ropsten was effectively unusable or very difficult to use. In addition, they were still expecting to have several active forks. He added:

“This begs the question, what is a testnet? What is its purpose? Do we need stable, ‘production’ testnets and ‘staging’ testnets?”

Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter

Follow us on Telegram | Twitter | Facebook

Ajay Narayan is a full-time journalist at AMBCrypto. He has majored in Economics, Political Science and Sociology. His interests are inclined towards writing and investing in cryptocurrencies.


Bitcoin Dominance Index [BDI] falls short of Bletchley Ethereum Token Index [BETI] in 2019

Biraajmaan Tamuly



Bitcoin Dominance Index [BDI] outperformed by Index based on the Ethereum blockchain in 2019
Source: Pixabay

One of the key factors which is often used to represent or indicate the potential of a particular cryptocurrency’s growth is its market capitalization. When the market capitalization of a coin or token showcases a positive hike, it usually has a positive impact on that particular asset’s market.

According to LongHash, the Bitcoin Dominance Index [BDI], which is used to measure Bitcoin’s market cap had been the dominant index since the beginning of 2019. It was observed that the BDI improved from 53 percent to 58 percent over the past few weeks after the largest crypto-asset underwent multiple price hikes.

XRP, which dominated Bitcoin by 1,600% back in 2017 on cryptocurrency exchange Bittrex in 2017, was currently down by almost 50% against Bitcoin in 2019. Ethereum [ETH] fared better comparatively, but was still down by 14% against the Bitcoin.

However, the Bletchley Ethereum Token, a token built on top of Ethereum, seemed to have outperformed Bitcoin this year.

The Bletchley Ethereum Token Index [BETI] can be utilized by investors for their allocation to tokens placed on top of the Ethereum blockchain. However, it should be noted that Ethereum is not a part of the index as it is an independent entity. The BETI is a weighted index, which means that the tokens with dominant market caps will take up a larger part of the index and the re-balance will take place at the end of a particular month.

For example, Tron [TRX] and Binance Coin [BNB] currently take up more than half of the BETI’s Weighted Index. Since the launch of their DEX, BNB has enjoyed a lucrative year with multiple hikes bringing the coin to $30 from under $6. Tron also witnessed major growth in market cap as it was up by 40% in comparison to the US dollar.

However, it is important to note that the major tokens on the BETI’s weighted index have all launched their own blockchain, at press time. Hence, it can indicate that the dominance enjoyed by BETI over the BDI over the last few months could point to a situation where the Ethereum blockchain was preferred for the launch of various tokens.

Despite the aforementioned reason, it is safe to state that Bitcoin was not the only entity which dominated the crypto-space this year.

Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter

Continue Reading