Validator income: separate protocol (i.e., network) fees from DIN issuance, stop calling both "rewards", and keep DIN for staking

Abierto
  • ¿Algo no está bien?
#340 0 comentarios 0 reacciones 3 asignados Ver en GitHub

Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día

@umermjd11 ya está trabajando en esto.

Desde el 13/11/2026.

Evaluación

Este issue todavía no se ha evaluado.

Descripción

enhancement

Decision

Validator income comes from two clearly separate sources:

  1. Protocol fees. Model owners pay for training rounds, and validators who did the work share them. Fees are paid in the native currency of the chain the protocol runs on (ETH on Optimism). While we're testing, a stablecoin may be used instead.
  2. DIN issuance. New DIN created on a fixed schedule over set periods, going to staked validators according to their measured, ongoing contribution, and added to their stake (similar to ETH issuance to Ethereum validators).

Separately:

  • Gas is paid in the chain's native currency to the chain itself. It is not protocol income.
  • Slashing is a penalty on stake for misbehaviour. It doesn't decide who receives fees or issuance.
  • DIN (INZ after #281) is the staking token. It enters circulation through issuance, not as a payment for individual batches.

This builds on #283 (data owners: no rewards at launch, stablecoin if ever).

Language: why "rewards" is a problem

Today the code and docs use "rewards" for everything a validator receives (giRewardPool, claimReward, aggregatorWeight as a "reward weight", RewardEngine). That causes confusion in three ways:

  • It blurs two different things: fees, which are paid by users for work done, and issuance, which is new DIN created by the protocol on a schedule.
  • It suggests validators are paid in DIN for each batch, when DIN is meant to be the staking token.
  • To outsiders it can read as a promised return or yield, which is not what either source is.

Proposed terms for code, docs and conversation:

Use Meaning Avoid
Fees (protocol fees) What model owners pay for a training round, shared among validators who did the work "rewards"
Issuance New DIN created on a set schedule, paid to stake by measured contribution "rewards", "emission rewards"
Contribution The measured work a validator did (e.g. revealing in a finalized batch, #335) "reward weight"
Gas Transaction costs paid to the chain in its native currency "fees" when we mean gas
Slashing A penalty on stake for misbehaviour —

"Rewards" should only be used, if at all, as a general word covering both fees and issuance, never for one of them on its own.

Where the code differs today (develop)

  • Model owners fund each GI's reward pool in DIN (DINTaskAuditor.depositRewards), and a GI can't start until it's funded (validateGIStart).
  • DinEmission mints DIN per GI, per model, on a decay schedule, and deposits it into that pool.
  • The pool is split by aggregatorWeight (#335 now counts only aggregators who revealed).
  • DinFeeRouter collects fees in DIN.
  • Dispute bonds are posted in DIN.

Questions to settle

  1. Fees: switch fee payments and validator fee shares to the chain's native currency (ETH on Optimism), with the option of a stablecoin while testing? Should the fee currency be set per deployment, so the same code works on any chain?
  2. Issuance: move from per-GI, per-model emission into a reward pool to a network-wide schedule over fixed periods, paid to stake by measured contribution?
  3. Contribution: what counts? For aggregators, revealing in a finalized batch (#335). What about auditors, uptime and consistency over time?
  4. Renaming: which names change in code and docs, e.g. giRewardPool, claimReward, aggregatorWeight, RewardEngine, and when (before the DevNet 2.0 deploy, alongside the #281 rename, or later)?
  5. Dispute bonds: keep them in DIN (like stake), or move them to the chain's native currency?
  6. Does any of this block the DevNet 2.0 deploy (#284), or can it follow?

@umeradl, could you scope this and say which parts block DevNet 2.0?

Lenguaje dominante
Python
Estrellas
4
Forks
7
Merge medio
5 d 15 h
PR fusionados (30 d)
43

Preparar el entorno

Este proyecto no incluye contenedor de desarrollo, Dockerfile ni guía de contribución, así que la configuración corre por tu cuenta: empieza por su README y consulta nuestra guía para la primera contribución para los pasos generales.

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Más de InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet

Todos los issues de InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet

Issues similares

Más issues de Python

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.