Which issue # does this PR address?
Closes#7604
Improvements to range sync including:
1. Contain column requests only to peers that are part of the SyncingChain
2. Attribute the fault to the correct peer and downscore them if they don't return the data columns for the request
3. Improve sync performance by retrying only the failed columns from other peers instead of failing the entire batch
4. Uses the earliest_available_slot to make requests to peers that claim to have the epoch. Note: if no earliest_available_slot info is available, fallback to using previous logic i.e. assume peer has everything backfilled upto WS checkpoint/da boundary
Tested this on fusaka-devnet-2 with a full node and supernode and the recovering logic seems to works well.
Also tested this a little on mainnet.
Need to do more testing and possibly add some unit tests.
Closes#7467.
This PR primarily addresses [the P2P changes](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/9840) in [fusaka-devnet-2](https://fusaka-devnet-2.ethpandaops.io/). Specifically:
* [the new `nfd` parameter added to the `ENR`](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/9840)
* [the modified `compute_fork_digest()` changes for every BPO fork](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/9840)
90% of this PR was absolutely hacked together as fast as possible during the Berlinterop as fast as I could while running between Glamsterdam debates. Luckily, it seems to work. But I was unable to be as careful in avoiding bugs as I usually am. I've cleaned up the things *I remember* wanting to come back and have a closer look at. But still working on this.
Progress:
* [x] get it working on `fusaka-devnet-2`
* [ ] [*optional* disconnect from peers with incorrect `nfd` at the fork boundary](https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/4407) - Can be addressed in a future PR if necessary
* [x] first pass clean-up
* [x] fix up all the broken tests
* [x] final self-review
* [x] more thorough review from people more familiar with affected code
Lighthouse is currently loggign a lot errors in the `RPC` behaviour whenever a response is received for a request_id that no longer exists in active_inbound_requests. This is likely due to a data race or timing issue (e.g., the peer disconnecting before the response is handled).
This PR addresses that by removing the error logging from the RPC layer. Instead, RPC::send_response now simply returns an Err, shifting the responsibility to the main service. The main service can then determine whether the peer is still connected and only log an error if the peer remains connected.
Thanks @ackintosh for helping debug!
Update `SAMPLES_PER_SLOT` to be number of custody groups instead of data columns. This should have no impact on the current implementation as config currently maintains a `group:subnet:column` ratio of `1:1:1`. **In short, this PR doesn't change anything for Fusaka, but ensures compliance with the spec and potential future changes.**
I've added separate methods to compute sampling columns and custody groups for clarity: `spec.sampling_size_columns` and `spec.sampling_size_custod_groups`
See the clarifications in this PR for more details: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/4251
This bug was first found and partially fixed by @VolodymyrBg in #7317 - this PR applies the same fix everywhere else.
The old logic updated the waker when it already matched the context, and did nothing when it was stale:
```rust
if waker.will_wake(cx.waker()) {
self.waker = Some(cx.waker().clone());
}
```
This is the wrong way around. We only want to update the waker if it doesn't match the current context:
```rust
if !waker.will_wake(cx.waker()) {
self.waker = Some(cx.waker().clone());
}
```
I don't think we've ever noticed any issues, but it’s a subtle bug that could lead to missed wakeups.
#6970
This allows for us to receive `SingleAttestation` over gossip and process it without converting. There is still a conversion to `Attestation` as a final step in the attestation verification process, but by then the `SingleAttestation` is fully verified.
I've also fully removed the `submitPoolAttestationsV1` endpoint as its been deprecated
I've also pre-emptively deprecated supporting `Attestation` in `submitPoolAttestationsV2` endpoint. See here for more info: https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/531
I tried to the minimize the diff here by only making the "required" changes. There are some unnecessary complexities with the way we manage the different attestation verification wrapper types. We could probably consolidate this to one wrapper type and refactor this even further. We could leave that to a separate PR if we feel like cleaning things up in the future.
Note that I've also updated the test harness to always submit `SingleAttestation` regardless of fork variant. I don't see a problem in that approach and it allows us to delete more code :)
Resolves#6767
This PR implements a basic version of validator custody.
- It introduces a new `CustodyContext` object which contains info regarding number of validators attached to a node and the custody count they contribute to the cgc.
- The `CustodyContext` is added in the da_checker and has methods for returning the current cgc and the number of columns to sample at head. Note that the logic for returning the cgc existed previously in the network globals.
- To estimate the number of validators attached, we use the `beacon_committee_subscriptions` endpoint. This might overestimate the number of validators actually publishing attestations from the node in the case of multi BN setups. We could also potentially use the `publish_attestations` endpoint to get a more conservative estimate at a later point.
- Anytime there's a change in the `custody_group_count` due to addition/removal of validators, the custody context should send an event on a broadcast channnel. The only subscriber for the channel exists in the network service which simply subscribes to more subnets. There can be additional subscribers in sync that will start a backfill once the cgc changes.
TODO
- [ ] **NOT REQUIRED:** Currently, the logic only handles an increase in validator count and does not handle a decrease. We should ideally unsubscribe from subnets when the cgc has decreased.
- [ ] **NOT REQUIRED:** Add a service in the `CustodyContext` that emits an event once `MIN_EPOCHS_FOR_BLOB_SIDECARS_REQUESTS ` passes after updating the current cgc. This event should be picked up by a subscriber which updates the enr and metadata.
- [x] Add more tests
https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/6875
- Enabled the linter in rate-limiter and fixed errors.
- Changed the type of `Quota::max_tokens` from `u64` to `NonZeroU64` because `max_tokens` cannot be zero.
- Added a test to ensure that a large value for `tokens`, which causes an overflow, is handled properly.
Currently `test_delayed_rpc_response` is flaky (possibly specific to Windows?), but I'm not sure why.
Enabled stdout logging in rpc_tests. Note that in nextest, std output is only displayed when a test fails.
Closes https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/6895
We need sync to retry custody requests when a peer CGC updates. A higher CGC can result in a data column subnet peer count increasing from 0 to 1, allowing requests to happen.
Add new sync event `SyncMessage::UpdatedPeerCgc`. It's sent by the router when a metadata response updates the known CGC
- Re-opens https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/6864 targeting unstable
Range sync and backfill sync still assume that each batch request is done by a single peer. This assumption breaks with PeerDAS, where we request custody columns to N peers.
Issues with current unstable:
- Peer prioritization counts batch requests per peer. This accounting is broken now, data columns by range request are not accounted
- Peer selection for data columns by range ignores the set of peers on a syncing chain, instead draws from the global pool of peers
- The implementation is very strict when we have no peers to request from. After PeerDAS this case is very common and we want to be flexible or easy and handle that case better than just hard failing everything.
- [x] Upstream peer prioritization to the network context, it knows exactly how many active requests a peer (including columns by range)
- [x] Upstream peer selection to the network context, now `block_components_by_range_request` gets a set of peers to choose from instead of a single peer. If it can't find a peer, it returns the error `RpcRequestSendError::NoPeer`
- [ ] Range sync and backfill sync handle `RpcRequestSendError::NoPeer` explicitly
- [ ] Range sync: leaves the batch in `AwaitingDownload` state and does nothing. **TODO**: we should have some mechanism to fail the chain if it's stale for too long - **EDIT**: Not done in this PR
- [x] Backfill sync: pauses the sync until another peer joins - **EDIT**: Same logic as unstable
### TODOs
- [ ] Add tests :)
- [x] Manually test backfill sync
Note: this touches the mainnet path!
closes https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/5785
The diagram below shows the differences in how the receiver (responder) behaves before and after this PR. The following sentences will detail the changes.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
subgraph "*** After ***"
Start2([START]) --> AA[Receive request]
AA --> COND1{Is there already an active request <br> with the same protocol?}
COND1 --> |Yes| CC[Send error response]
CC --> End2([END])
%% COND1 --> |No| COND2{Request is too large?}
%% COND2 --> |Yes| CC
COND1 --> |No| DD[Process request]
DD --> EE{Rate limit reached?}
EE --> |Yes| FF[Wait until tokens are regenerated]
FF --> EE
EE --> |No| GG[Send response]
GG --> End2
end
subgraph "*** Before ***"
Start([START]) --> A[Receive request]
A --> B{Rate limit reached <br> or <br> request is too large?}
B -->|Yes| C[Send error response]
C --> End([END])
B -->|No| E[Process request]
E --> F[Send response]
F --> End
end
```
### `Is there already an active request with the same protocol?`
This check is not performed in `Before`. This is taken from the PR in the consensus-spec, which proposes updates regarding rate limiting and response timeout.
https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/3767/files
> The requester MUST NOT make more than two concurrent requests with the same ID.
The PR mentions the requester side. In this PR, I introduced the `ActiveRequestsLimiter` for the `responder` side to restrict more than two requests from running simultaneously on the same protocol per peer. If the limiter disallows a request, the responder sends a rate-limited error and penalizes the requester.
### `Rate limit reached?` and `Wait until tokens are regenerated`
UPDATE: I moved the limiter logic to the behaviour side. https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/5923#issuecomment-2379535927
~~The rate limiter is shared between the behaviour and the handler. (`Arc<Mutex<RateLimiter>>>`) The handler checks the rate limit and queues the response if the limit is reached. The behaviour handles pruning.~~
~~I considered not sharing the rate limiter between the behaviour and the handler, and performing all of these either within the behaviour or handler. However, I decided against this for the following reasons:~~
- ~~Regarding performing everything within the behaviour: The behaviour is unable to recognize the response protocol when `RPC::send_response()` is called, especially when the response is `RPCCodedResponse::Error`. Therefore, the behaviour can't rate limit responses based on the response protocol.~~
- ~~Regarding performing everything within the handler: When multiple connections are established with a peer, there could be multiple handlers interacting with that peer. Thus, we cannot enforce rate limiting per peer solely within the handler. (Any ideas? 🤔 )~~
Resolves#6811
Rename `GOSSIP_MAX_SIZE` to `MAX_PAYLOAD_SIZE` and remove `MAX_CHUNK_SIZE` in accordance with the spec.
The spec also "clarifies" the message size limits at different levels. The rpc limits are equivalent to what we had before imo.
The gossip limits have additional checks.
I have gotten rid of the `is_bellatrix_enabled` checks that used a lower limit (1mb) pre-merge. Since all networks we run start from the merge, I don't think this will break any setups.
I've been working at updating another library to latest Lighthouse and got very confused with RPC request Ids.
There were types that had fields called `request_id` and `id`. And interchangeably could have types `PeerRequestId`, `rpc::RequestId`, `AppRequestId`, `api_types::RequestId` or even `Request.id`.
I couldn't keep track of which Id was linked to what and what each type meant.
So this PR mainly does a few things:
- Changes the field naming to match the actual type. So any field that has an `AppRequestId` will be named `app_request_id` rather than `id` or `request_id` for example.
- I simplified the types. I removed the two different `RequestId` types (one in Lighthouse_network the other in the rpc) and grouped them into one. It has one downside tho. I had to add a few unreachable lines of code in the beacon processor, which the extra type would prevent, but I feel like it might be worth it. Happy to add an extra type to avoid those few lines.
- I also removed the concept of `PeerRequestId` which sometimes went alongside a `request_id`. There were times were had a `PeerRequest` and a `Request` being returned, both of which contain a `RequestId` so we had redundant information. I've simplified the logic by removing `PeerRequestId` and made a `ResponseId`. I think if you look at the code changes, it simplifies things a bit and removes the redundant extra info.
I think with this PR things are a little bit easier to reasonable about what is going on with all these RPC Ids.
NOTE: I did this with the help of AI, so probably should be checked
N/A
Adds endpoints to add and remove trusted peers from the http api. The added peers are trusted peers so they won't be disconnected for bad scores. We try to maintain a connection to the peer in case they disconnect from us by trying to dial it every heartbeat.
- Part of https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/6767
Validator custody makes the CGC and set of sampling columns dynamic. Right now this information is stored twice:
- in the data availability checker
- in the network globals
If that state becomes dynamic we must make sure it is in sync updating it twice, or guarding it behind a mutex. However, I noted that we don't really have to keep the CGC inside the data availability checker. All consumers can actually read it from the network globals, and we can update `make_available` to read the expected count of data columns from the block.
I feel it's preferable to do this explicitly by updating the revision on `Cargo.toml` rather than implicitly by letting `Cargo.lock` control the revision of the branch.
- #6452 (partially)
Remove dependencies on `store` and `lighthouse_network` from `eth2`. This was achieved as follows:
- depend on `enr` and `multiaddr` directly instead of using `lighthouse_network`'s reexports.
- make `lighthouse_network` responsible for converting between API and internal types.
- in two cases, remove complex internal types and use the generic `serde_json::Value` instead - this is not ideal, but should be fine for now, as this affects two internal non-spec endpoints which are meant for debugging, unstable, and subject to change without notice anyway. Inspired by #6679. The alternative is to move all relevant types to `eth2` or `types` instead - what do you think?
We forked `gossipsub` into the lighthouse repo sometime ago so that we could iterate quicker on implementing back pressure and IDONTWANT.
Meanwhile we have pushed all our changes upstream and we are now the main maintainers of `rust-libp2p` this allows us to use upstream `gossipsub` again.
Nonetheless we still use our forked repo to give us freedom to experiment with features before submitting them upstream
NA
Bumps the `ethereum_ssz` version, along with other crates that share the dep.
Primarily, this give us bitfields which can store 128 bytes on the stack before allocating, rather than 32 bytes (https://github.com/sigp/ethereum_ssz/pull/38). The validator count has increase massively since we set it at 32 bytes, so aggregation bitfields (et al) now require a heap allocation. This new value of 128 should get us to ~2m active validators.
N/A
2 changes:
1. Replace Option::map_or(true, ...) with is_none_or(...)
2. Remove unnecessary `Into::into` blocks where the type conversion is apparent from the types
We don't need to store `BehaviourAction` for `ready_requests` and therefore avoid having an `unreachable!` on #6625.
Therefore this PR should be merged before it
Addresses #6854.
PeerDAS requires unsubscribing a Gossip topic at a fork boundary. This is not possible with our current topic machinery.
Instead of defining which topics have to be **added** at a given fork, we define the complete set of topics at a given fork. The new start of the show and key function is:
```rust
pub fn core_topics_to_subscribe<E: EthSpec>(
fork_name: ForkName,
opts: &TopicConfig,
spec: &ChainSpec,
) -> Vec<GossipKind> {
// ...
if fork_name.deneb_enabled() && !fork_name.fulu_enabled() {
// All of deneb blob topics are core topics
for i in 0..spec.blob_sidecar_subnet_count(fork_name) {
topics.push(GossipKind::BlobSidecar(i));
}
}
// ...
}
```
`core_topics_to_subscribe` only returns the blob topics if `fork < Fulu`. Then at the fork boundary, we subscribe with the new fork digest to `core_topics_to_subscribe(next_fork)`, which excludes the blob topics.
I added `is_fork_non_core_topic` to carry on to the next fork the aggregator topics for attestations and sync committee messages. This approach is future-proof if those topics ever become fork-dependent.
Closes https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/6854
Currently we track a key metric `PEERS_PER_COLUMN_SUBNET` in a getter `good_peers_on_sampling_subnets`. Another PR https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/6922 deletes that function, so we have to move the metric anyway. This PR moves that metric computation to the metrics spawned task which is refreshed every 5 seconds.
I also added a few more useful metrics. The total set and intended usage is:
- `sync_peers_per_column_subnet`: Track health of overall subnets in your node
- `sync_peers_per_custody_column_subnet`: Track health of the subnets your node needs. We should track this metric closely in our dashboards with a heatmap and bar plot
- ~~`sync_column_subnets_with_zero_peers`: Is equivalent to the Grafana query `count(sync_peers_per_column_subnet == 0) by (instance)`. We may prefer to skip it, but I believe it's the most important metric as if `sync_column_subnets_with_zero_peers > 0` your node stalls.~~
- ~~`sync_custody_column_subnets_with_zero_peers`: `count(sync_peers_per_custody_column_subnet == 0) by (instance)`~~
Currently we have very poor coverage of range sync with unit tests. With the event driven test framework we could cover much more ground and be confident when modifying the code.
Add two basic cases:
- Happy path, complete a finalized sync for 2 epochs
- Post-PeerDAS case where we start without enough custody peers and later we find enough
⚠️ If you have ideas for more test cases, please let me know! I'll write them
- Re-opened PR from https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/6869
Writing and running tests I noted that the sync RPC requests are very verbose now.
`DataColumnsByRootRequestId { id: 123, requester: Custody(CustodyId { requester: CustodyRequester(SingleLookupReqId { req_id: 121, lookup_id: 101 }) }) }`
Since this Id is logged rather often I believe there's value in
1. Making them more succinct for log verbosity
2. Make them a string that's easy to copy and work with elastic
Write custom `Display` implementations to render Ids in a more DX format
_ DataColumnsByRootRequestId with a block lookup_
```
123/Custody/121/Lookup/101
```
_DataColumnsByRangeRequestId_
```
123/122/RangeSync/0/5492900659401505034
```
- This one will be shorter after https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/6868
Also made the logs format and text consistent across all methods
Part of
- https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/6258
To address PeerDAS sync issues we need to make individual by_range requests within a batch retriable. We should adopt the same pattern for lookup sync where each request (block/blobs/columns) is tracked individually within a "meta" request that group them all and handles retry logic.
- Building on https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/6398
second step is to add individual request accumulators for `blocks_by_range`, `blobs_by_range`, and `data_columns_by_range`. This will allow each request to progress independently and be retried separately.
Most of the logic is just piping, excuse the large diff. This PR does not change the logic of how requests are handled or retried. This will be done in a future PR changing the logic of `RangeBlockComponentsRequest`.
### Before
- Sync manager receives block with `SyncRequestId::RangeBlockAndBlobs`
- Insert block into `SyncNetworkContext::range_block_components_requests`
- (If received stream terminators of all requests)
- Return `Vec<RpcBlock>`, and insert into `range_sync`
### Now
- Sync manager receives block with `SyncRequestId::RangeBlockAndBlobs`
- Insert block into `SyncNetworkContext:: blocks_by_range_requests`
- (If received stream terminator of this request)
- Return `Vec<SignedBlock>`, and insert into `SyncNetworkContext::components_by_range_requests `
- (If received a result for all requests)
- Return `Vec<RpcBlock>`, and insert into `range_sync`
`TODO(das)` now that PeerDAS is scheduled in a hard fork we can subscribe to its topics on the fork activation. In current stable we subscribe to PeerDAS topics as soon as the node starts if PeerDAS is scheduled.
This PR adds another todo to unsubscribe to blob topics at the fork. This other PR included solution for that, but I can include it in a separate PR
- https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/5899/files
Include PeerDAS topics as part of Fulu fork in `fork_core_topics`.
Addresses #6706
This PR activates PeerDAS at the Fulu fork epoch instead of `EIP_7594_FORK_EPOCH`. This means we no longer support testing PeerDAS with Deneb / Electrs, as it's now part of a hard fork.
N/A
In https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/6329 we changed `max_blobs_per_block` from a preset to a config value.
We weren't using the right value based on fork in that PR. This is a follow up PR to use the fork dependent values.
In the proces, I also updated other places where we weren't using fork dependent values from the ChainSpec.
Note to reviewer: easier to go through by commit
N/A
Add metrics that tell us if a duplicate message that we received was from a mesh peer or from a non mesh peer that we requested with iwant message.
* Add eip7636 support
* Add `version()` to the `lighthouse_version` crate and make the `enr.rs` file use it.
* Hardcode version, Add `client_name()`, remove unneeded flag.
* Make it use the new function.
* Make cargo fmt zip it
