HackMD
    • Sharing Link copied
    • /edit
    • View mode
      • Edit mode
      • View mode
      • Book mode
      • Slide mode
      Edit mode View mode Book mode Slide mode
    • Note Permission
    • Read
      • Only me
      • Signed-in users
      • Everyone
      Only me Signed-in users Everyone
    • Write
      • Only me
      • Signed-in users
      • Everyone
      Only me Signed-in users Everyone
    • More (Comment, Invitee)
    • Publishing
    • Commenting Enable
      Disabled Forbidden Owners Signed-in users Everyone
    • Permission
      • Forbidden
      • Owners
      • Signed-in users
      • Everyone
    • Invitee
    • No invitee
    • Options
    • Versions and GitHub Sync
    • Transfer ownership
    • Delete this note
    • Template
    • Save as template
    • Insert from template
    • Export
    • Google Drive Export to Google Drive
    • Gist
    • Import
    • Google Drive Import from Google Drive
    • Gist
    • Clipboard
    • Download
    • Markdown
    • HTML
    • Raw HTML
Menu Sharing Help
Menu
Options
Versions and GitHub Sync Transfer ownership Delete this note
Export
Google Drive Export to Google Drive Gist
Import
Google Drive Import from Google Drive Gist Clipboard
Download
Markdown HTML Raw HTML
Back
Sharing
Sharing Link copied
/edit
View mode
  • Edit mode
  • View mode
  • Book mode
  • Slide mode
Edit mode View mode Book mode Slide mode
Note Permission
Read
Only me
  • Only me
  • Signed-in users
  • Everyone
Only me Signed-in users Everyone
Write
Only me
  • Only me
  • Signed-in users
  • Everyone
Only me Signed-in users Everyone
More (Comment, Invitee)
Publishing
More (Comment, Invitee)
Commenting Enable
Disabled Forbidden Owners Signed-in users Everyone
Permission
Owners
  • Forbidden
  • Owners
  • Signed-in users
  • Everyone
Invitee
No invitee
   owned this note    owned this note      
Published Linked with GitHub
Like BookmarkBookmarked
Subscribed
  • Any changes
    Be notified of any changes
  • Mention me
    Be notified of mention me
  • Unsubscribe
Subscribe
# Hiring OASIS to referee the EIP process ##### tags: `proposal` `oasis` ## The Problem * Ethereum is growing up fast. The [EIP process](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1) is starting to become a powerful game. * The standards process is infamously a [political minefield](https://www.amazon.com/Open-Standards-Digital-Age-Enterprise/dp/1107612047/). And for better and worse, very few current players in the EIP process have standards experience. * Some of our standards are of [lackluster quality](https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JSON-RPC) yielding [substantially different](http://cdetr.io/eth-compat-table/) [implementations](https://medium.com/tokenanalyst/weird-quirks-we-found-in-ethereum-nodes-d5dcbad0c86). * If CryptoTwitter is any indication, the Ethereum Magicians wish to proclaim themselves the official [governmental body for EIPs](https://ethereum-magicians.org/c/eips). As respectfully as it can be said---when it comes to standards, the Magicians do not have the experience to navigate the trecherous waters that they travel in. The EIP process is too mission-critical to permit such risk. ## Proposed Solution * Several (including me) were considering having Ethereum join the IETF. But members of the IETF management itself thought it was a bad idea to join them, citing IETF would chain us into a slow-moving bureaucratic nightmare. So I went in search of alternatives. * A battle-hardened [ex-Tor colleague](https://twitter.com/luckygreen) suggested [OASIS](https://www.oasis-open.org/), which operates [oasis-open-projects.org](https://oasis-open-projects.org/). OASIS is a nonprofit standards organization with a [pretty solid record](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OASIS_(organization)#Standards_under_development). OASIS's primary benefit over other standards organizations is that they are vastly more flexible and try to help you move forward rather than try to keep you out. * I propose we establish an Ethereum project under OASIS. OASIS brings experienced yet flexible referees for pre-existing projects and a [mature process for creating standards](https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/tc-process-2017-05-26). By happenstance, OASIS recently started a framework for FOSS "[Open Projects](https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/open-projects-process)". Per OASIS regulation, our Open Project would be governed by: (1) the Project Governing Board (PGB) made up of the Sponsoring organizations and appointed experts; (2) a Technical Steering Committee (TSC). The Technical Steering Committee would presumably consist of the Ethereum Magicians' EIP-ring. * It remains unclear whether OASIS and Ethereum will be a good match, and we should start small. I propose that we develop the standard for the [JSON-RPC specification](https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip-remote-procedure-call-specification/1537) [cited above](#The-Problem) as an Open Project within OASIS. If it goes well, then we can discuss expanding the number of EIPs developed at OASIS. If that goes well, then we can even consider replacing the entire EIP process. * OASIS claims to be good at discovering unexpected orgs who would have commercial interests in Ethereum. But it's unclear how valuable this would be to us. * **Update**: The *proposed founding PGB members* of the Ethereum OASIS Open Project are: Ethereum Foundation, Ethereum Enterprise Alliance, and Consensys. Additionally, Nick Johnson (long-steward of the EIP process) is to be appointed as an individual board member. Candidates for later joining the board are: IBM, Microsoft. ## The Upsides * Foremost, we will have protections in place to guard the EIP process against outside corruption or encumbered by novice hands. * OASIS supplies a formal decision-making process that is time-tested and robust to abuse. * OASIS supplies independent referees ("Process Managers"). * Will inform us of best practices in standards creation, e.g., making specs generated by a grammar. We can decide if we want to incorporate them. This will probably reduce ambiguity in our standards and improve consistency among clients. * Currently, the lead custodian of the EIP process is Nick Johnson. Outsourcing some of these duties to OASIS will free Nick to spend more time on Ethereum Name Service---a high priority project. * Ethereum is starting to be seen as one of the responsible adults in the blockchain world. Working with OASIS will further solidify that image. * OASIS will be more flexible with processes and structure than alternatives like IETF, ISO, or Linux Foundation. * If we ever want it (and if we are successful, we probably will not least because having them build comepting Ethereum standards instead isn't a good plan), OASIS-approved standards will more easily garner further approval by larger international standard organizations like ISO/IEC/ITU. ## The Downsides * Doing an OASIS Open Project requires annual dues of >= $25,000. * The [annual due](https://oasis-open-projects.org/sponsorship/) varies with the size of the organization (for EF it's 1k, for Consensys 15k). This starting fee covers all core services. We can optionally set higher mandatory dues as gate-keeping. These additional funds become a generic pot of money for the PGB to hire consultants, sponsor events, donate to EFgrants/ETHGlobal, etc. * The exact fees from each member remain to be decided. Currently, Consensys is required to pay 15k per year. We probably can't permit Consensys to be the primary payer, so that means EF will also donate 15k. So that gets us to 30k. We can then put EEA on it for >= 1k. Perhaps 5k would be reasonable. * It opens the EIP process to some new attacks. Particularly, any organization that is willing to pay the annual Project Sponsor due holds a seat on the Ethereum Project Governing Board (PGB). This risk of "anyone can join" (and thus get a vote), can be mitigated by several factors: * Our PGB can require higher annual dues to ensure participation is limited to serious stakeholders. This filters out casual obstructionists unless they have money to donate. * Our PGB may grant full PGB seats to appointed experts (in addition to the Project Sponsors). These appointed experts can be used to offset any incoming disruptive Project Sponsors. * Our PGB may increase the voting threshold for "critical milestones". This raises the bar for major changes. * OASIS Open Projects have a Code of Conduct that can include pretty much anything we want such as hurdles to reraising already decided issues (OASIS can show clauses that have previously worked). The OASIS Process Managers will then enforce said Code of Conduct. * Formally incorporating our EIP process under OASIS can be seen as premature. But I still think it's a good idea because: (1) The Magicians aren't super familiar with how to do standards. (2) It future-proofs our EIP process against inevitable abuse. * For every EIP using OASIS, we will have to make some small adjustments to the [current EIP process](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1). Fortunately, OASIS's initial review of the EIP-1 process is that it's largely okay, and any required changes to be OASIS-compliant would only change the outcome in edge cases. * The Linux Foundation considers OASIS a competitor to their business model, as such using OASIS could cause mild friction. I'm personally not worried about this. As evidence, IBM is a tier-1 sponsor of OASIS, yet Linux Foundation still closely works with IBM. ## The Alternatives * We could simply leave the Magicians in custody of the EIP process. * If we weren't going to use OASIS, but also didn't want to leave the Magicians to themselves, the most plausible alternative is using the Ethereum Enterprise Alliance. EEA claims to have an experienced standards team, and EEA would presumably be more focused on Ethereum, however, there might be cultural mismatch. One benefit of using EEA is that it might create more cooperation between Ethereum and EEA. If curious about EEA's work in this area, see the [Ethereum Enterprise Alliance spec](https://entethalliance.org/technical-documents/) and [instructional video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIkClTpYjgE&feature=youtu.be). * **Update**: EEA says that they'd love to help with our standards, but they don't want to lead it. * **Proposal Addendum**: Give an EEA-person (probably [Chaals Nevile](mailto:[email protected])) a spot on the Project Governing Board. This will give EEA's expertise a role to play while still making the EIP largely autonomous. --- If we decide to move forward, then we have... # Next Steps 1. The Ethereum Foundation drafts an Open Project Charter using the [template](https://github.com/oasis-open-projects/documentation/blob/master/templates/draft-charter.md) provided by OASIS. The charter spells out what success looks like: the project’s purpose, scope, business benefits, as well as naming the initial members of the PGB and the TSC. I propose to make the troubled [JSON-RPC spec](https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/JSON-RPC) the first EIP to go through the OASIS process. 2. Ethereum Foundation, with at least one other founding member, submits the charter and OASIS establishes the “Ethereum Open Project”. OASIS can then work with the PGB and TSC to document and fine-tune the day-to-day operating rules as needed to achieve the project’s goals. 3. Ethereum Foundation contributes the JSON-RPC spec to the project. The team works to improve the spec and raise it to the level of minimum OASIS standards.

Import from clipboard

Advanced permission required

Your current role can only read. Ask the system administrator to acquire write and comment permission.

This team is disabled

Sorry, this team is disabled. You can't edit this note.

This note is locked

Sorry, only owner can edit this note.

Reach the limit

Sorry, you've reached the max length this note can be.
Please reduce the content or divide it to more notes, thank you!

Import from Gist

Import from Snippet

or

Export to Snippet

Are you sure?

Do you really want to delete this note?
All users will lost their connection.

Create a note from template

Create a note from template

Oops...
This template has been removed or transferred.


Upgrade

All
  • All
  • Team
No template.

Create a template


Upgrade

Delete template

Do you really want to delete this template?

This page need refresh

You have an incompatible client version.
Refresh to update.
New version available!
See releases notes here
Refresh to enjoy new features.
Your user state has changed.
Refresh to load new user state.

Sign in

Sign in via SAML

or

Sign in via GitHub

Help

  • English
  • 中文
  • 日本語

Documents

Tutorials

Book Mode Tutorial

Slide Example

YAML Metadata

Resources

Releases

Blog

Policy

Terms

Privacy

Cheatsheet

Syntax Example Reference
# Header Header 基本排版
- Unordered List
  • Unordered List
1. Ordered List
  1. Ordered List
- [ ] Todo List
  • Todo List
> Blockquote
Blockquote
**Bold font** Bold font
*Italics font* Italics font
~~Strikethrough~~ Strikethrough
19^th^ 19th
H~2~O H2O
++Inserted text++ Inserted text
==Marked text== Marked text
[link text](https:// "title") Link
![image alt](https:// "title") Image
`Code` Code 在筆記中貼入程式碼
```javascript
var i = 0;
```
var i = 0;
:smile: :smile: Emoji list
{%youtube youtube_id %} Externals
$L^aT_eX$ LaTeX
:::info
This is a alert area.
:::

This is a alert area.

Versions

Versions and GitHub Sync

Sign in to link this note to GitHub Learn more
This note is not linked with GitHub Learn more
 
Add badge Pull Push GitHub Link Settings
Upgrade now

Version named by    

More Less
  • Edit
  • Delete

Note content is identical to the latest version.
Compare with
    Choose a version
    No search result
    Version not found

Feedback

Submission failed, please try again

Thanks for your support.

On a scale of 0-10, how likely is it that you would recommend HackMD to your friends, family or business associates?

Please give us some advice and help us improve HackMD.

 

Thanks for your feedback

Remove version name

Do you want to remove this version name and description?

Transfer ownership

Transfer to
    Warning: is a public team. If you transfer note to this team, everyone on the web can find and read this note.

      Link with GitHub

      Please authorize HackMD on GitHub

      Please sign in to GitHub and install the HackMD app on your GitHub repo. Learn more

       Sign in to GitHub

      HackMD links with GitHub through a GitHub App. You can choose which repo to install our App.

      Push the note to GitHub Push to GitHub Pull a file from GitHub

        Authorize again
       

      Choose which file to push to

      Select repo
      Refresh Authorize more repos
      Select branch
      Select file
      Select branch
      Choose version(s) to push
      • Save a new version and push
      • Choose from existing versions
      Available push count

      Upgrade

      Pull from GitHub

       
      File from GitHub
      File from HackMD

      GitHub Link Settings

      File linked

      Linked by
      File path
      Last synced branch
      Available push count

      Upgrade

      Danger Zone

      Unlink
      You will no longer receive notification when GitHub file changes after unlink.

      Syncing

      Push failed

      Push successfully