CIP-???? | Ouroboros Peras - Faster Settlement

[bwbush]

We propose Peras, an enhancement to the Ouroboros Praos protocol that introduces a voting layer for optimistic fast settlement.

Peras, or more precisely Ouroboros Peras, is an extension of Ouroboros Praos that addresses one of the known issues of blockchains based on Nakamoto-style consensus, namely settlement time. Peras achieves that goal while being self-healing, preserving the security of Praos, and being light on resources.

---

(rendered proposal)

[rphair]

apologies @bwbush if this is premature, but given the title I couldn't resist taking a look and noticed a few things which might be of help to consider early (among some standard editing chores).

[rphair]

(intended to include in last review)

[rphair]

@bwbush we can't keep a code repository within a CIP or use it as a build source, according to precedent and pending an explicit statement that will be added to CIP-0001 soon (last time it was confirmed: recently with #848 (review)). The convention would be for the .agda files & folder to be kept in an external repository which is linked from this CIP. 🙏

[bwbush]

@bwbush we can't keep a code repository within a CIP or use it as a build source, according to precedent and pending an explicit statement that will be added to CIP-0001 soon (last time it was confirmed: recently with #848 (review)). The convention would be for the .agda files & folder to be kept in an external repository which is linked from this CIP. 🙏

Thanks for the information. I'll consult with my colleagues and get back to you regarding this.

[rphair]

@bwbush @abailly - applying freshly created label Category: Consensus Proposals belonging to the `Consensus` category. - please chime in with this issue with any feelings about how you see the CIP process participation for this category developing:

• Project Enlisting - Rethinking Post-Chang #898

I've marked this Unconfirmed only because it hasn't been assigned a candidate CIP number yet. In my opinion this could happen at any time (@Ryun1 @perturbing @Crypto2099 - shall we put on Review for next meeting to confirm this?).

[perturbing]

Compliments on how well this CIP is written, it dissects a complex design into readable sections and the motivation of the CIP sets the perfect stage to understand the context of it all. It was a long read, but I learned a ton about Peras, thank you 👍

In general, I think this CIP would benefit from more structure due to its size, as is done in CIP-1694. Perhaps the addition of a table of contents for faster navigation and an occasional collapsed section (for example the Agda spec section), would be good.

[rphair]

A high level description published recently that may be of help in review: https://iohk.io/en/blog/posts/2024/10/14/ouroboros-peras-the-next-step-in-the-journey-of-cardano-s-protocol-1/

[bwbush]

@rphair, I believe that b59c80e responds to all outstanding comments and suggestions.

In particular, I added subsections where there were long blocks of text and I included a collapsable table of contents. (The TOC might be redundant because github will not dislay a TOC for markdown documents if one pressed an icon on the upper left of the document. Feel free to remove the TOC if you see fit.)

[rphair]

thanks @bwbush - according to our usual process that means this will be up for Review at the next meeting (https://hackmd.io/@cip-editors/101). I believe all will be in favour of giving this a CIP number there, even if some remaining issues are found in the meantime.

Also, if you would please tag (for editors' reference) whom you believe has the most interest in reviewing and/or contributing to Consensus proposals, we'll keep track of these for future use.