[Draft] Add how to verify l2 state on l1 page#1067
[Draft] Add how to verify l2 state on l1 page#1067Jason-W123 wants to merge 10 commits intomasterfrom
Conversation
Jason-W123
requested review from
TucksonDev,
anegg0,
hkalodner,
mahsamoosavi and
symbolpunk
as code owners
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
|
In review |
|
|
||
| Assume that there is a contract called `foo` on child chain, and its contract address is `fooAddress`, now we want to prove its state value at storage `slot`. | ||
|
|
||
| To verify the state, we need a Merkle Trie Verifier contract, one example is [Lib_MerkleTrie.sol](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism-legacy/blob/8205f678b7b4ac4625c2afe351b9c82ffaa2e795/packages/contracts/contracts/libraries/trie/Lib_MerkleTrie.sol). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we have optimism's repo refer here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm... is an example available that does not point to a competitor's assets?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's open source so I think we're happy to use it
symbolpunk
left a comment
symbolpunk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Awesome new doc. Some nits are noted above; I'm pausing review until aligned (marking as Draft to indicate that we're aligning/iterating)
|
|
||
| Before we begin, we will introduce the key component: rblock, assertion and send roots. | ||
|
|
||
| # Rblock and Assertion |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's some duplication between this content and The Rollup Chain in Inside Arbitrum Nitro.
This is also explaining how things work, not how you, dear developer, can do something.
One option would be to:
- Merge all of the information that explains "how it works" into the above-linked Inside Arbitrum Nitro concept document (so we're not fragmenting this content across multiple docs that may drift apart as Nitro evolves).
- Provide a condensed version of this upfront, linking to Inside Nitro.
- Jump right into "How to verify a confirmed child chain block hash".
It could also be useful to explicitly state - when and why would a developer need to complete these steps? When do they need to care about manually verifying state? Is this a "just in case you don't trust the underlying protocol" thing? I imagine some developers may expect this to be baked into the protocol and effectively abstracted away from the happy path, so getting more precise about the "user story" above can help us align on a more precisely targeted content objective.
As a developer who ______, I want to learn how to ________ when/because ________
I'll pause this review until we're aligned on the above nits 👍
symbolpunk
changed the title
|
Thanks for syncing up @Jason-W123 - next steps for me:
(If this is time-sensitive, we can push now and handle the above through a follow-up PR) |
Co-authored-by: symbolpunk <103775631+symbolpunk@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: symbolpunk <103775631+symbolpunk@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
5 participants
No description provided.