[WIP] [fix]: Address UMIP-179 feedback #602

pxrl · 2024-04-22T10:03:45Z

Specify proposer action on invalid FilledV3Relay repaymentChainId.
Clarify proposer action on un-executable RelayerRefundLeaf.
Add link to OZ audit for Across V3.

- Specify proposer action on invalid FilledV3Relay repaymentChainId. - Clarify proposer action on un-executable RelayerRefundLeaf. - Add link to OZ audit for Across V3.

pxrl · 2024-04-22T10:15:57Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md

+If a validated `FilledV3Relay` event specifies an invalid `repaymentChainId`, the proposer shall issue repayment on the fill destination chain.
+Reasons for the `repaymentChainId` to be considered invalid are:
+- `repaymentChainId` is not supported by Across.
+- `inputToken` is not supported as a repayment token on `repaymentChainId`.


I think forcing repayment on the destination chain is the only safe approach here, since if the relayer fills via a contract on zkSync and the proposer proposes repayment on some other chain then the relayer will never receive their repayment.

Yeah, good point. I think that's right.

pxrl · 2024-04-22T10:29:29Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md

- The LP fee is typically referenced as a multiplier of the `V3FundsDeposited` `inputAmount`, named `realizedLpFeePct` elsewhere in this document.
+- The LP fee as a multiplier of `inputAmount` (typically named `realizedLpFeePct` elsewhere in this document) shall be:
+  - Promoted to 18 decimals, where 1e18 represents 100%, and
+  - Truncated (zeroed) between 0 and 1e10, providing 8 decimals of effective precision.


Would appreciate feedback on the wording here.

Do you think it's easier to understand if you show the math?

The LP fee is truncated via the following formula: output = input / 1e10 * 1e10

Maybe:

- Available precision to 8 decimals. Truncated via [output = input / 1e10 * 1e10]

mrice32

Looks good! A few minor comments. Only issue I see is that one part is ambiguous.

mrice32 · 2024-05-06T13:38:54Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md

- The LP fee is typically referenced as a multiplier of the `V3FundsDeposited` `inputAmount`, named `realizedLpFeePct` elsewhere in this document.
+- The LP fee as a multiplier of `inputAmount` (typically named `realizedLpFeePct` elsewhere in this document) shall be:
+  - Promoted to 18 decimals, where 1e18 represents 100%, and
+  - Truncated (zeroed) between 0 and 1e10, providing 8 decimals of effective precision.


Do you think it's easier to understand if you show the math?

The LP fee is truncated via the following formula: output = input / 1e10 * 1e10

mrice32 · 2024-05-06T13:39:28Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md


 ### Computing Bundle LP Fees
 The bundle LP fee for a target block range on a SpokePool and token pair shall be determined by summing the applicable LP fees for each of the following validated events:
 - `FilledV3Relay`

 ### Computing Relayer Repayments
 For a validated `FilledV3Relay` event, the relayer repayment amount shall be computed as follows:
- `(inputAmount * (1 - realizedLpFeePct)) / 1e18`, where `realizedLpFeePct` is computed over the set of HubPool `l1Token`, `originChainId` and `repaymentChainId` at the HubPool block number corresponding to the relevant `V3FundsDeposited` `quoteTimestamp`.
+- `(inputAmount * (1e18 - realizedLpFeePct)) / 1e18`, where `realizedLpFeePct` is computed over the set of HubPool `l1Token`, `originChainId` and `repaymentChainId` at the HubPool block number corresponding to the relevant `V3FundsDeposited` `quoteTimestamp`.


mrice32 · 2024-05-06T13:50:25Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md

+If a validated `FilledV3Relay` event specifies an invalid `repaymentChainId`, the proposer shall issue repayment on the fill destination chain.
+Reasons for the `repaymentChainId` to be considered invalid are:
+- `repaymentChainId` is not supported by Across.
+- `inputToken` is not supported as a repayment token on `repaymentChainId`.


Yeah, good point. I think that's right.

mrice32 · 2024-05-06T13:58:21Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md

@@ -380,6 +385,12 @@ The set of relayer refund leaves shall be ordered according to:

 The Relayer Refund Leaf `leafId` field shall be numbered according to the ordering established above, starting at 0.

+If a Relayer Refund Leaf would be unable to be executed due to an ERC20 reversion when transferring the repayment token to the recipient on the destination chain, the proposer may exclude the relayer repayment from the Relayer Refund Root.


Two things:

Long term, I think this would be better handled in the contracts (having a data structure to store unexecuted payments that can be claimed anytime).

I think the way this is written, it's ambiguous. I think we should say to be excluded from the bundle, it needs to be unexecutable at the bundle end block of the chain where the repayment will take place.

james-a-morris

two possible copy changes

james-a-morris · 2024-07-23T15:34:30Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md

- The LP fee is typically referenced as a multiplier of the `V3FundsDeposited` `inputAmount`, named `realizedLpFeePct` elsewhere in this document.
+- The LP fee as a multiplier of `inputAmount` (typically named `realizedLpFeePct` elsewhere in this document) shall be:
+  - Promoted to 18 decimals, where 1e18 represents 100%, and
+  - Truncated (zeroed) between 0 and 1e10, providing 8 decimals of effective precision.


Maybe:

- Available precision to 8 decimals. Truncated via [output = input / 1e10 * 1e10]

james-a-morris · 2024-07-23T15:37:12Z

UMIPs/umip-179.md

-
-Note:
- If a particular relayer refund is known to be unexecutable, it can be removed from the bundle by the proposer if a sufficient public justification is made before the proposal. This is intended to deal with unlikely situations, such as ag centralized token issuer blacklisting an address that is due a refund. If this leaf were to remain unaltered, this blacklisted address could block other addresses from recieving refunds.
+Across v3 has been [audited by OpenZeppelin](https://blog.openzeppelin.com/across-v3-incremental-audit).


Suggested change

Across v3 has been [audited by OpenZeppelin](https://blog.openzeppelin.com/across-v3-incremental-audit).

Across v3 has been audited by OpenZeppelin, shared [here](https://blog.openzeppelin.com/across-v3-incremental-audit) and [here](https://blog.openzeppelin.com/across-v3-and-oval-incremental-audit).

[fix]: Address UMIP-179 feedback

867733d

- Specify proposer action on invalid FilledV3Relay repaymentChainId. - Clarify proposer action on un-executable RelayerRefundLeaf. - Add link to OZ audit for Across V3.

pxrl requested review from nicholaspai and mrice32 April 22, 2024 10:03

Fix repayment chain wording

a45310c

pxrl commented Apr 22, 2024

View reviewed changes

pxrl added 2 commits April 22, 2024 12:19

Fix 1 -> 1e18

d06ad9e

Clarify LP fee precision

4812cc3

pxrl commented Apr 22, 2024

View reviewed changes

pxrl requested review from james-a-morris and bmzig April 22, 2024 14:20

mrice32 reviewed May 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

james-a-morris reviewed Jul 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

pxrl requested review from chrismaree and Reinis-FRP October 8, 2024 14:34

pxrl mentioned this pull request Dec 19, 2024

improve(Dataworker): Remove 0-value refunds and 0-value empty-message slow fills across-protocol/relayer#1957

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[WIP] [fix]: Address UMIP-179 feedback #602

[WIP] [fix]: Address UMIP-179 feedback #602

pxrl commented Apr 22, 2024

pxrl Apr 22, 2024

mrice32 May 6, 2024

pxrl Apr 22, 2024

mrice32 May 6, 2024

james-a-morris Jul 23, 2024

mrice32 left a comment •

edited

Loading

mrice32 May 6, 2024

mrice32 May 6, 2024

mrice32 May 6, 2024

mrice32 May 6, 2024

james-a-morris left a comment

james-a-morris Jul 23, 2024

james-a-morris Jul 23, 2024

		@@ -380,6 +385,12 @@ The set of relayer refund leaves shall be ordered according to:

		The Relayer Refund Leaf `leafId` field shall be numbered according to the ordering established above, starting at 0.

		If a Relayer Refund Leaf would be unable to be executed due to an ERC20 reversion when transferring the repayment token to the recipient on the destination chain, the proposer may exclude the relayer repayment from the Relayer Refund Root.

	Across v3 has been [audited by OpenZeppelin](https://blog.openzeppelin.com/across-v3-incremental-audit).
	Across v3 has been audited by OpenZeppelin, shared [here](https://blog.openzeppelin.com/across-v3-incremental-audit) and [here](https://blog.openzeppelin.com/across-v3-and-oval-incremental-audit).

[WIP] [fix]: Address UMIP-179 feedback #602

Are you sure you want to change the base?

[WIP] [fix]: Address UMIP-179 feedback #602

Conversation

pxrl commented Apr 22, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mrice32 left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

james-a-morris left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mrice32 left a comment •

edited

Loading