NoM AMA#3 - Technical Questions

  1. @Jeron / @Dumeril
    Now that AZ is live, there are teams looking to work on adding functionality for the network. You’ve mentioned that the community is responsible for the implementation of a VM, but you have zApps and an NFT standard on your roadmap. So maybe you already have an idea about requirements for a possible implementation, maybe regarding performance, space requirements, functionalities, programmability. It would help us to know more details about your vision for these things [and the network in general], what your current research focus is and what you are currently working on. How can we ensure that core team and community efforts are not being duplicated given limited dev resources?

  2. V :cyclone:, [2/23/22 8:39 PM]
    #AMA could you elaborate on the current integrated smart contract layer and provide a high level proof of concept for building a runtime on top of this?

  3. @Dumeril / @Jeron
    In looking at runtimes for SCs, which nodes should run the VMs? Should the VM run on all nodes? Just pillars or sentinels? Would the planned eventual sentinel upgrade potentially conflict with a pillar based vm implementation?

  4. @Dumeril / @Jeron
    Can you please elaborate on your recommendation of WASM as a suitable VM for SC runtimes? What benefits does it bring over other VMs? Are there alternatives of merit that should be considered in your view?

  5. @Jeron
    Which parts of the NFT standard implementation will be done by the core team? Or will core team members submit to AZ as community members? I can understand if you don’t want to explicitly reveal this shift, but it’s probably going to be fairly obvious if it happens

  6. @Dumeril
    How could steganography improve on the “save-as” problem, when everything you embed into a digital object is in fact copied with the object?

  7. @Jeron
    Recently there has been some discussion of transition on a BIP-like framework for network upgrades. With the advent of acceleratorZ, there may be future network upgrades proposed outside the core team. Over what timeframe do you see ZIPs being implemented? Within Phase 0?

  8. @Dumeril / @Jeron
    For the BSC bridge, what is running on the NoM side? Is it an embedded smart contract? Is any work being done off chain?

  9. @Dumeril, [2/24/22 4:55 AM]
    #Ama do you have any publishable test results regarding network performance or throughput?

  10. @Jeron, [2/24/22 8:35 AM]
    Some time ago it was mentioned that there would be a QSR<>ZNN swap function within the wallet. What are the pros/cons of this being implemented as a fixed rate peg vs a free floating rate with an AMM/LP? Is this an initiative the core team are pursuing in Phase 0?

  11. @Jeron, [2/24/22 8:35 AM]
    From a technical perspective what are the unique benefits that NoM brings over competing L1s from the core dev team’s point of view? Is it solving the trilemma? Is it the flexibility of what can be built on top of the base network? If we can refine this it will help us promote the network externally.

  12. hewwo, [2/23/22 8:46 PM]
    Assuming the Bitcoin ethos is laying in the concept of decentralisation at the consensus level, how is Zenon aligned with that idea ?

  13. hewwo, [2/23/22 8:46 PM]
    s the Zenon Network falling into the dPOS territory ? From my understanding, the network is driven by a very few amount of leaders / consensus nodes, am I right ?

  14. hewwo, [2/23/22 8:46 PM]
    After several discussions with Or from Chromia it seems that, depending on the consensus / protocol, the marketcap is an extremely sensitive metric affecting the security of the network. A bad actor can easily buy 50%+ validators given certain conditions. What would be the effect of a black swan event on the Zenon Network security ? Aka pillars VS sentinels, design change, possible reactions etc.

  15. @Jeron , [2/24/22 8:35 AM]
    What privacy enhancing features could be added to the network design? Based on TG chats, it would seem this is best done at the protocol level. Have the core team considered a privacy upgrade to the protocol?

  16. @Jeron, [2/24/22 8:35 AM]
    How will ZNN/QSR emissions be decided at the end of phase 0? By vote, as a ZIP? Is a fork req for implementation?

  17. @zyler9985 [2/24/22 3:37 AM]
    #AMA how is using PoW for transactions going to be practical as the network scales in size to potentially a global standard?

  18. @Jeron , [2/24/22 8:35 AM]
    Do you still forsee sentinels taking on a role of providing computation as a service (eg through unikernals) as described in the WP? Would this be computation be paid for in QSR?

  19. @Dumeril, [4/26/22]
    Can you describe your [short/mid-term] visions regarding practical handling of improvement / development of the protocol? As a concrete example, sentinels are not implemented yet. Assuming you still consider them necessary as described in the wp; are these ‘core features’ that the team will work on, or do you see us already in a place where these changes are handled via ZIPs and the community is responsible?

  20. @Dumeril, [4/26/22]
    When designing the node and the data structures / storage; did you have potential support for pruned nodes in mind or can you speculate from the top of your head how difficult it would be to implement one? (Thinking about mobile nodes for example)

  21. @0x3639, [4/30/22]
    Do Pillars need to open any inbound ports on their firewall?

  • If yes, how are Pillars producing momentums as expected with NO inbound ports open?
  • If no, is there any technical reason to “hide” the Pillar behind other public nodes if the Pillar sits behind a firewall and all inbound ports are closed?
  1. @Dumeril, [4/30/22]
    To the best of my knowledge Pillars currently don’t do pow. As this deviates from the process outlined in the whitepaper, I would like to know the reasoning behind this change.

  2. @Dumeril, [4/30/22]
    Virtual voting seems to be another concept that did not make it into the implementation. Is this a concept you are still aiming to implement?

  3. @Dumeril, [4/30/22]
    During a public code review the variation on the bech32 encoding scheme bech32m came up. Was the choice of bech32 over bech32m a deliberate one and would it be possible to switch to the other if required for some reason? It seems to be also used in taproot.

Source of Questions: NoM Technical AMA - Google Docs


Funny that you changed the topic from technical to non-technical (as kaine specifically asked for a technical one)
While I agree that these questions are very high level (after all, it’s nearly half a year now that we put them together), that’s probably not on purpose? We gotta start somewhere talking again (hopefully?)

Sorry, that was a dyslexic moment. I read “non technical” rather than “NoM Technical”. I changed the title. Thx for pointing that out!!

1 Like