Closed s1fr0 closed 1 year ago
Why this issue https://github.com/vacp2p/rln-contract/issues/8 is part of the acceptance criteria? what is its impact?
It was an open issue which I assume come after some internal agreement. The impact is that if needs to be addressed soon or later, it means that we'll need to redeploy once more and I would prefer to have only one more definitive deploy of the contract.
The issue description is about redeployment due to the hash function update, and the fee option is not directly relevant. Putting it in the acceptance criteria gives a false signal of the fee option being a blocker.
Either we shall revise the issue description to list all the issues that will result in contract redeployment, or the acceptance criteria shall be revised. And I think the second one makes more sense since there might be multiple redeployments e.g., after implementing a more secure slashing strategy which will impact the contract interface as well.
Fair, edited.
Where is this contract deployed to now? Mainnet? Testnet?
Currently deployed on Goerli testnet at 0x4252105670fe33d2947e8ead304969849e64f2a6
. We didn't deploy yet a new version of the contract with fixed Poseidon hash and checks on already registered commitments (https://github.com/vacp2p/rln-contract/pull/12).
Redeployed on Sepolia - https://github.com/vacp2p/rln-contract/blob/main/deployments/sepolia/RLN.json
Problem
After the recent Poseidon refactor that sets the correct round constants, we should redeploy the contract to allow RLN users to correctly withdraw their funds, if needed.
Acceptance criteria