Blockchain Experts Answer to your Ethereum 2.0 Questions
Developers at Hexlant have categorized FAQs to provide readers with more understanding of Ethereum 2.0 in general.
Staking in Ethereum 2.0
Q1: Can a participant qualify as an active validator with ETH less than the minimum deposit amount (32 ETH)? What would be the most effective way to participate in attestation when holding more than 32 ETH?
A1: No. A participant must transfer 32 ETH to be recognized as an active validator. When holding more than 32 ETH, It is most effective to run multiple validator nodes, rather than to run a single validator node. Since every validator nodes require the stake of 32 ETH, staking ETH in multiples of 32 is the best option.
For instance, if a participant currently holds 1024 ETH, the most effective way to participate as a validator is to equally distribute 1024 ETH into 32 wallets (32 ETH per 1 wallet) and make transfer to the deposit contract.
Q2: Can the keys for Ethereum 1.0 be used in Ethereum 2.0?
A2: No. Although both networks utilize the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (“ECDSA”) to generate keys, the parameters of the curve used to create the keys in Ethereum 2.0 is fundamentally different from Ethereum 1.0.
Validators in Ethereum 2.0
Q3: It is said that more rewards are given to those validators who are constantly online. What does online/offline mean in this context?
A3: Online/offline of a wallet signifies the active/inactive state of the validator node. The more active the validator nodes, the more rewards are given since it means that the validator is faithfully fulfilling its role in the attestation.
Q4: If the validator node does not function due to the unexpected events such as blackout or natural disaster, does the validator receive penalty?
A4: Yes. However, if there are plenty of active validators in the network at the time of node malfunction, the imposed penalty would be minimal. To avoid penalty from node malfunction, preventive measures such as dividing the Validator Key into m-n and storing each piece in different computers can be a good option.
Q5: Due to the small number of validators in Phase 0, the network may be vulnerable to malicious attacks. If the group of validators with malicious intention initially controls over 2/3 of the shares, what would happen?
A5: If a specific group wants to control the network, it must possess over 2/3 of the total staked Ethereum. Additionally, the asset value in the initial phase of Ethereum 2.0 would be relatively small; thereby, it is expected to have a minimal effect considering the cost of input is far more greater. Furthermore, malicious behavior by the attacker would result in the loss of staked ETH from Slashing.
In PoW consensus, an attacker with over 51% of computing power is unstoppable. However, the Slashing condition in Ethereum 2.0 prevents this from happening. Considering all factors, the possibility of attacks is substantially low in Ethereum 2.0; even if the attack is succeded, it would merely have resulted in a temporary stop in the network.
Phase 0 in Ethereum 2.0
Q6: In Phase 0, can the validators receive rewards even if there are no transactions? If so, how can the validators withdraw the rewards?
A6: In the initial stage of Phase 0, there would be no transactions created, but the block proposal and attestation are carried out, so validators can still receive the rewards. The most appropriate way to withdraw the rewards is to broadcast exit message to nodes. After the exit queue (27-hour withdrawal delay), the funds can be withdrawn.
Q7: After the Phase 0 release, it is expected that the Ethereum 1.0 and Ethereum 2.0 will co-exist until the development of Ethereum 2.0 is fully complete. In this situation, will it be possible to transfer Ether interchangeably between the Ethereum 1.0 and Ethereum 2.0?
A7: One-way transfer of sending ETH to deposit contract to participate as a validator in the Beacon Chain will be possible. In Phase 0, only one-way bridge will be implemented, but there are two possible options to pursue the coexistence of two Ethereum networks.
1) Relocate the Ethereum 1.0 network to the Shard Chain in the Ethereum 2.0.
2) Eliminate existing PoW-based chains. Instead of miners, “eth1_friendly_Validators” take over the role of attestation.
Additionally, to minimize the gap between two Ethereum networks, the Ethereum Foundation has announced the “Difficulty Bomb” update on Ethereum 1.0 to reduce the demand for Ethereum 1.0 mining. Therefore, depending on the development speed of the Shard Chain, the coexistence of the two networks may just be for a short period of time.
Q8: Are the Web3-based applications (Metamask, My Ether Wallet, etc.) in Ethereum 1.0 interoperable on the Ethereum 2.0?
A8: No. The network structure of Ethereum 1.0 and Ethereum 2.0 is fundamentally different; therefore, the applications are not likely to be interoperable.
Q9: Why is there a maximum of 64 committees per slot?
A9: When the Shard Chain is applied, a total of 64 shards is generated per block. Since the Beacon Chain selects committee in each shard, theoretically, there could be a maximum of 64 committees per slot. In Ethereum 2.0 testnet, there are approximately 7 committees per slot, including all the participating validators. All activated validators are participating in all epochs.
Titled “Ethereum 2.0: Phase X”, Hexlant Issue Report 12 reviews the technical details and features applied on Ethereum 2.0. It shares insights of blockchain experts at Hexlant to provide answers to the many questions that readers might have on Ethereum 2.0.
Hexlant Ethereum 2.0 Report URL : https://bit.ly/2N6RpKM
Visit us at www.hexlant.com for more information !
