Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 18, 2020. It is now read-only.

Fee specification for PoS HonteD #7

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

adrianbrink
Copy link

No description provided.

Adrian Brink added 3 commits January 18, 2018 12:14
I accidentally deleted 70% of the files while moving to the new repo.
Never use `rm -rf` to get rid of something in a hurry.
@adrianbrink adrianbrink changed the title Feature/spec Fee specification for PoS HonteD Jan 22, 2018
between waiting for more signatures and timing out from the proposal round.
It incentives validators to create stronger connectivity between themselves
as well as helps to prevent censorship since it puts an economic cost on it.
// TODO: How to retrieve the block proposer and signatures for each block.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Re 5% extra. As you noted above, we can't create tokens out of nothing. This means that those 5% need to be taken from general pool of fees - taken from pockets of other validators. Which creates an incentive to not give proposer a signature.

This can probably be rectified by setting those 5% of fees aside. If proposer does not get 100% of signatures, everyone splits 95% of fees and 5% is burned. If it gets 100% of signatures, everyone splits 95% of fees and proposer gets 5% on top of that.

## Introduction

This document describes the fee distribution mechanism for HonteD, the
decentralised exchange, which is a Plasma zone that implements IBC.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please expand on IBC. Inter-Blockchain-Connection?

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants