-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Rollup support #37
Comments
since the data is sent to Ethereum as calldata it is enough if the api support just that. We let the encoding happen in the Sequencer node but remove the signing. So the API would be: |
Ah okay, now I understand, I't not only the Sequencer that needs API support for transaction batches but also the Proposer for state roots. And these two actors could be separate PKys! |
Perhaps a better approach would be to offer signing capabilities, just like hardware wallets do: Also, having Ethers support would mean the integration is easier. NOT A GOOD IDEA: |
The purpose of this excersise is to pull private keys needed to interact with Rollup contracts. I've identified two PKs:
The SEQUENCER_PRIVATE_KEY, PROPOSER_PRIVATE_KEY interacts with the following contracts:
L1_WALLET_KEY interacts with the following contracts:
It is true that anyone can relay messages. So on first look it may seem counter-intuitive to add the If the Sequencer is accruing fees that represent our revenue, we may need to add a way to transfer ETH out of the account. The deployer node (in docker compose) uses only the DEPLOYER_PRIVATE_KEY all other PKs are marely used to pull the address:
OVM_StateCommitmentChain.sol OVM_CanonicalTransactionChain.sol In TS this part looks like this:
and the encoding part:
So in my opinion, I would leave this schema on the sequencer side and let the Vault marely decode base64 and send it through to the contract. OVM_CanonicalTransactionChain.sol OVM_L1CrossDomainMessenger.sol
OVM_L2CrossDomainMessenger.sol
As the Vault could interact both with L1 and L2, the configuration part would need to be expanded so that it supports talking to nodes on l1 and on l2.
|
Thanks @kevsul for the first review. |
API would need to support:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: