Cointime

Download App
iOS & Android

Reducing latency games by levelling the playing field on block size for PBS

From ethresearch by antonydenyer

Thanks to @simbro for reviewing

Abstract

For this post, block size refers to the number of serialised bytes in a block. Currently, the average block size is over 100k https://etherscan.io/chart/blocksize 1. Note that we are talking about bytes, not gas limit.

Every block builder is motivated to submit a block to the PBS auction as late as possible. The more time a block builder has, the more time they have to accumulate transactions and, therefore, priority fees. For the purpose of this discussion, we assume no MEV is at play.

Discrete Blocks and Latency Games

Apologies if this is old news, but it’s worth reiterating. The role of a block builder is multifaceted and requires proficiency in several infrastructure tasks.

  1. Block builders must be able to access transactions; solo validators often miss out on priority fees because they are not well connected to the public mempool. A block builder with good connectivity to the mempool will likely win more blocks. They may even partner with wallets and other transaction originators to fast-track mempool transactions into their builder pipeline.
  2. They must have good networking connectivity with the auctioneer, aka relay. The lower the latency between them and the auctioneer, the more time they have to build blocks.
  3. Because the block builder is privileged, they can offer value-added features that no other entity can offer. Namely, revert protection through eth_sendBundle. The builder who can build a block the fastest whilst protecting private order flow from reverts will win more blocks (once again, we assume no mev).

Because blocks are discrete periods, pressure is applied to all parts of the stack towards the end of the block. Consequently, a block builder will do what it can to increase the amount of time it has to focus on its core activity, building the most profitable block.

Observations

Block builders will likely submit multiple bids using multiple strategies. Sometimes, the bids for smaller blocks are received in time, while those for larger blocks are not. This is simply because larger blocks are slower. Consequently, transactions that could be included in a block are not being picked up.

Hypothetical Scenario

A block builder has 100 transactions in their local mempool, totalling 0.5 eth in priority fees. The network is silent, and no other transactions are entering the mempool. The block builder submits the block (block a) to the auction. Near the very end of the block, another transaction enters the mempool with a whopping 1 eth in priority fees. The block builder now submits two more bids at the same time.

block b - containing our single juicy priority fee transaction for 1 eth.block c - containing 101 transactions with all the transactions we have totalling 1.5 eth.

Both bids are now higher than the previous bid. One of three scenarios now stands:

  1. The original bid wins as neither subsequent bid was reached in time by the auction before the deadline.
  2. The small block reaches the auction before the deadline, pushing out the previously submitted block of 100 transactions.
  3. The big block reaches in time, and all transactions are included.

It is easy to imagine an interplay between latency, block size and priority fees that are entirely opaque to users and sophisticated actors.

Real-world example

JetBuilder built https://etherscan.io/block/19598122 1 and only used 12% of the block space available, paying ~0.15 eth for the block. We observed them missing at least 40 transactions that could have been included in that block. The example transactions were in the mempool for at least five blocks (thanks to https://www.ethernow.xyz 1). They all landed on-chain in either the next block or the one after.

block_19598122_missed.txt (4.2 KB)

Proposal

We should have some floor usage in gas terms to prevent transactions from bullying other transactions out of a block.

The gas floor target could be calculated in many ways, such as a predefined fixed target, half the gas limit, or a dynamic adjustment based on previous consumption (similar to 1559). It doesn’t need to be elegant or exact; it just needs to be something to incentivise block builders to utilise block space.

The penalty for not ‘filling’ the block would be something like gas target missed * base fee. This is the same price as putting a transaction in the block, except the block builder doesn’t get priority fees. Theoretically, a block builder could make a transaction with themselves, but the result is the same.

We are simply putting a price on what the network perceives as the underutilisation of block space.

Comments

All Comments

Recommended for you

  • A whale sold 224 WBTC worth $14.4 million in the past three hours

    According to on-chain analyst @ai_9684xtpa, address 0x486...1505e sold 224 WBTC tokens worth $14.4 million through Cowswap in the past three hours, making a profit of $830,000 (selling at an average price of $64,203). The seller had bought 371 WBTC tokens at an average price of $60,504 between November 2023 and April 2024, and still holds 280 WBTC tokens.

  • CryptoQuant CEO: BTC needs to remain above $80,000 for miners to remain profitable after halving

    Bitcoin mining revenue significantly decreased in May due to the impact of the fourth Bitcoin halving event. On May 1st, the total revenue from block rewards and transaction fees reached a new low of only $26.3 million.CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju calculated that, based on current conditions, Bitcoin needs to stay above $80,000 for miners to remain profitable after the halving. However, most miners have taken proactive measures to upgrade their mining equipment to lower long-term operating costs and remain competitive.

  • BTC returns to above 65,000 USDT, up 2.08% in 24 hours

    OKX market shows that BTC has returned to above 65000 USDT, now reporting 65102 USDT, with a 24-hour increase of 2.08%.

  • Hundre Finance attackers have withdrawn 162.2 ETH worth of crypto assets from Curve

    According to PeckShield monitoring, the attacker of Hundre Finance withdrew 784,000 3Crv from Curve and exchanged it for 273 ETH. In addition, they also exchanged 305.6 WOO, 39 PAXG, 200,000 FRAX, and 100,000 DAI, totaling 162.2 ETH. The attacker then bridged 1,034 ETH (2.17 million USD), 842.8K DAI, 1.11 million USDT, 1.27 million USDC, and 457.3 FRAX from Optimism to Ethereum. They also exchanged a total of 480,000 USDC for 142.6 WETH, 306 WOO, and 39 PAXG. They also exchanged 1.11 million USDT for 500.3 thousand USD worth of DAI and 613.8 thousand USD worth of FRAX. Additionally, on April 15, 2023, approximately 786,000 USD worth of USDC was added to Curve3Pool.

  • LayerZero co-founder: "Self-reporting of witch activities" is not aimed at individuals, but at industrial witch studios

    Bryan Pellegrino, co-founder and CEO of LayerZero, stated on social media that the "Self-Report Sybil Activity" is not targeting individual users, but rather large industrial witch farms (studios).Earlier, LayerZero Labs launched the "Self-Report Sybil Activity" plan, which allows witch addresses to self-report related addresses on a designated page and receive an expected allocation of 15%, without answering any questions. The deadline is May 17th, 19:59:59.

  • Argentina’s House of Representatives Passes Bill to Regularize Cryptocurrency Taxation

    The Argentine Chamber of Deputies has passed a cryptocurrency tax normalization bill aimed at advancing a series of important government reforms. The bill introduces the possibility of regularizing previously undeclared cryptocurrency assets, up to a maximum of $100,000, without paying government collection fees. However, if the value of cryptocurrency assets exceeds this limit, the government will apply preferential tax rates based on the taxpayer's declaration date.

  • GNUS on Fantom was attacked, with a loss of about $1.27 million

    According to Beosin's monitoring, GNUS on Fantom was attacked, resulting in a loss of approximately $1.27 million. GNUS stated on the X platform that due to recent vulnerabilities, hackers were able to mint fake GNUS tokens on Fantom, transfer them to Ethereum and Polygon through the Axelar Bridge, and sell them to existing liquidity pools. We will take a snapshot of the blocks before the exploit. To ensure fairness, please do not purchase GNUS tokens after the exploit, as we will issue new tokens.

  • Pandu Financial Group received the first round of strategic equity investment of tens of millions of Hong Kong dollars, led by Longling Capital

    Pando Financial Group announced it has received tens of millions of Hong Kong dollars in strategic equity investment led by Longling Investment. Pando Financial Group stated that it plans to use the newly injected funds for key growth areas, including market expansion, innovative product development, key talent recruitment, and technology upgrades, aiming to accelerate the layout of opportunities in the era of virtual assets through these strategic initiatives. Currently, the group's asset management scale has reached $500 million. Pando Asset, a subsidiary of Pando Financial Group, established its headquarters in Zurich in 2022 and issued the Pando 6 spot virtual asset fund (Bitcoin/Ethereum spot ETPs) on the Swiss Exchange. Another subsidiary of Pando Financial Group, Pando Limited, obtained licenses from the Securities and Futures Commission in Hong Kong, including Type 1 (securities trading), Type 4 (advising on securities), and Type 9 (asset management), as well as public fund qualifications, and was approved to manage investment portfolios with more than 10% invested in virtual assets and issued several excellent performance actively managed ETF products.

  • Hong Kong Monetary Authority launches industry consultation on “renaming virtual banks as licensed digital banks”

    Hong Kong virtual banks released their annual reports for 2023 last week. The eight virtual banks collectively lost about 2.99 billion yuan last year, a decrease of about 12% compared to the total loss of about 3.4 billion yuan in 2022. In response to the occasional feeling of "unreality" brought about by the term "virtual" in recent years, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority has initiated a consultation on renaming with the eight virtual banks, the Hong Kong Bankers Association, the Hong Kong Restricted Licensed Banks and Deposit-taking Companies Association, with the aim of renaming virtual banks as licensed digital banks, for a period of one month. It is reported that in the Asian region, similar banks have different names in different places. South Korea and Singapore issue licenses under the name of "digital bank", with Singapore further dividing them into digital full banks (DFB) and digital wholesale banks (DWB).

  • Chairman of the Russian State Duma Financial Market Committee: I do not support a complete ban on the circulation of cryptocurrencies in Russia

    Anton Gorelkin, Chairman of the Financial Market Committee of the Russian State Duma, said that he does not support a complete ban on the circulation of cryptocurrency in Russia. He explained in a post on Telegram that this restriction is not intended to ban the use of all cryptocurrencies, but rather to regulate the establishment of cryptocurrency exchange platforms within the legal framework of Russia. Anton Gorelkin also believes that the establishment of a legitimate cryptocurrency infrastructure in Russia is influenced by geopolitical realities, and this requires consideration of factors related to international relations. He further added that allowing such infrastructure may expose Russian companies to Western sanctions. In addition, Anton Gorelkin pointed out that this restriction may be lifted in the future, and users can still use foreign cryptocurrency exchanges and over-the-counter trading services as before. However, the impact on many over-the-counter cryptocurrency services in Moscow is still uncertain.