Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move ConwayTreasuryValueMismatch into UTXO rule #4691

Open
lehins opened this issue Oct 15, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Move ConwayTreasuryValueMismatch into UTXO rule #4691

lehins opened this issue Oct 15, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
conformance dijkstra Ledger era that will follow after Conway

Comments

@lehins
Copy link
Collaborator

lehins commented Oct 15, 2024

Placing ConwayTreasuryValueMismatch was suboptimal for two reasons:

  • Formal spec places it into the UTXO rule, instead of LEDGER
  • Monetary checks like these really do belong in UTXO rules morally
  • ConwayTreasuryValueMismatch predicate is not checked for phase2 invalid transactions. This is not a danger by any means, since we always initially assume all transactions are phase2 valid, until proven otherwis. Therefore such transaction will always be rejected from mempool regardless of the flag. But, even if it wasn't rejected for a phase2 invalid transaction, we already allow many parts of phase2 invalid transactions to be contain phase1 inconsistencies. That being said, conformance tests are likely to be affected.
@lehins lehins added conformance dijkstra Ledger era that will follow after Conway labels Oct 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
conformance dijkstra Ledger era that will follow after Conway
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant