[Utility] Hello GeoZones

[Olshansk]

EDIT: Currently blocked by https://github.com/pokt-network/pocket/pull/683.

Objective

Add the first iteration of GeoZones to the utility module.

Origin Document

• The Utility Protocol Design Spec
• https://forum.pokt.network/t/v1-how-to-enforce-fairness-and-decentralization-a-first-approach/3992

Goals

• Introduce geoZone into the utility module
• Create a foundation for using, setting and manipulating geozones in the future
• Leverage ChatGPT to help with the automation of this task to alleviate redundant work in the future

Deliverable

• [ ] Add GeoZone to the entire codebase where relevant (persistence, postgres, utility, protobufs, CLI, etc...)
• [ ] Make GeoZones an array of strings
• [ ] If the list of GeoZones is empty -> treat it as "all geozones"
• [ ] If the list of GeoZones is a non-zero list -> constrain business logic to just that list
• [ ] A script that implements the addition of geozones using ChatGPT
  • [ ] For example, loop through all files and feed that into ChatGPT asking "add geozones next to relay chains"

Non-goals / Non-deliverables

• Selecting how we should define geozones (uber h3, regions, postgis, etc..,)
• Managing "geozone expansion" (e.g. if nothing is found in geozone X, look around it)

General issue deliverables

• [ ] Update the appropriate CHANGELOG(s)
• [ ] Update any relevant local/global README(s)
• [ ] Update relevant source code tree explanations
• [ ] Add or update any relevant or supporting mermaid diagrams

Testing Methodology

• [ ] All tests: make test_all
• [ ] LocalNet: verify a LocalNet is still functioning correctly by following the instructions at docs/development/README.md
• [ ] k8s LocalNet: verify a k8s LocalNet is still functioning correctly by following the instructions here

---

Creator: @Olshansk

[Olshansk]

@RawthiL I know you've had concerns around the decision of your research impacting development, so I wanted to get your feedback on the scope of this issue before we put it into production.

Please review it and let me know if you have any questions or recommendations for change.

[RawthiL]

No questions, you are coding it compatible to any option (multi / single geozone) if I understand it correctly, which is best given that we have not reached an agreement on it. We can later force the list of geozones to one when staking if a singe-geozone logic is implemented.

[Olshansk]

No questions, you are coding it compatible to any option (multi / single geozone) if I understand it correctly, which is best given that we have not reached an agreement on it. We can later force the list of geozones to one when staking if a singe-geozone logic is implemented.

For sure. Just wanted to keep you posted and in the loop as promised per the discussion we started here.