Skip to content

Add EIP: Hardware and Bandwidth Recommendations#9270

Merged
eth-bot merged 42 commits into
ethereum:masterfrom
kevaundray:kw/hardware-bandwidth-recs
Mar 14, 2025
Merged

Add EIP: Hardware and Bandwidth Recommendations#9270
eth-bot merged 42 commits into
ethereum:masterfrom
kevaundray:kw/hardware-bandwidth-recs

Conversation

@kevaundray

@kevaundray kevaundray commented Jan 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions Bot added c-new Creates a brand new proposal s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-informational labels Jan 26, 2025
@eth-bot

eth-bot commented Jan 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

✅ All reviewers have approved.

@eth-bot eth-bot added the e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus label Jan 26, 2025
kevaundray
kevaundray commented Jan 26, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/draft_hardware_and_bandwidth_recs.md Outdated
Comment on lines +97 to +103
- Statista states that as of January 2024:
- The global average download for broadband is 92 Mbps and the global average upload is 43 Mpbs.
- The global average download for mobile is 50 Mbps and 11 Mbps
- GSMA report showing the state of mobile internet connectivity in 2024 shows that:
- The mobile upload speeds in Higher Income Countries (HIC) is about 18 Mbps
- The global average mobile download is 48 Mbps.

@kevaundray kevaundray Jan 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

GSMA link is https://www.gsma.com/r/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/The-State-of-Mobile-Internet-Connectivity-Report-2024.pdf?utm_source=website&utm_medium=button&utm_campaign=somic24

Page 39 for the upload speeds of HIC and page 5 for the 48 Mbps figure.

Statista link is: https://www.statista.com/statistics/896779/average-mobile-fixed-broadband-download-upload-speeds/

@kevaundray kevaundray Jan 26, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let me know how you would want these to be referred to in the document

kevaundray
kevaundray commented Jan 26, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/draft_hardware_and_bandwidth_recs.md Outdated
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Jan 26, 2025
kevaundray
kevaundray commented Jan 26, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/draft_hardware_and_bandwidth_recs.md Outdated
kevaundray
kevaundray commented Jan 26, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/draft_hardware_and_bandwidth_recs.md Outdated

RAM/memory is dominated by state cache. As of January 2025, it is possible to run a full node with 16GB of RAM, however this has been known to not work with all combinations of EL and CL clients in the past.

On 32GB vs 64GB; 32GB works right now, however we recommend 64GB as [preliminary benchmarks](https://hackmd.io/@han/bench-hash-in-snark) have shown that zk-STARKS can consume a significant amount of memory and the difference in cost relative to the entire hardware setup for a validator is insignificant.

@kevaundray kevaundray Jan 26, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I saw that EIPs 2926, 2938, 3298, 3416 and 3607 also used hackmd links however the contents of them can easily be changed, so I wonder if there is a rule about using them?

@github-actions github-actions Bot added w-ci Waiting on CI to pass and removed w-ci Waiting on CI to pass labels Jan 26, 2025
potuz
potuz reviewed Jan 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/draft_hardware_and_bandwidth_recs.md Outdated
smartprogrammer93
smartprogrammer93 reviewed Jan 27, 2025
View reviewed changes

@smartprogrammer93 smartprogrammer93 left a comment •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Given EIPs are immutable once they become final, does it make sense to place these requirements in an EIP? I expect requirements will need to be updated in a couple of years. In that case, we will need to create a different EIP amending this one. Then, operators will need to check 2 different EIPs to know what the current requirements are. Seems impractical to me.

@unnawut unnawut mentioned this pull request Jan 27, 2025
Merged
chfast
chfast reviewed Jan 27, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/draft_hardware_and_bandwidth_recs.md Outdated
@restakeservice

restakeservice commented Jan 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

good idea!

@kevaundray

kevaundray commented Jan 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Given EIPs are immutable once they become final, does it make sense to place these requirements in an EIP? I expect requirements will need to be updated in a couple of years. In that case, we will need to create a different EIP amending this one. Then, operators will need to check 2 different EIPs to know what the current requirements are. Seems impractical to me.

In the call someone mentioned that, the status of this could be changed to "live" and we modify it in-place instead of creating a new EIP each time. I would defer to the EIP maintainers regarding that and whats possible there.

I agree that creating a new EIP whenever we change specs is undesirable.

@kevaundray kevaundray changed the title Add EIP: Hardware and Bandwidth Requirements for Full Nodes and Validators Add EIP: Hardware and Bandwidth Recommendations for Full Nodes and Validators Jan 27, 2025
@github-actions github-actions Bot removed the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Jan 27, 2025
This was referenced Jan 27, 2025
Closed
Closed
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Jan 27, 2025
kamilchodola
kamilchodola reviewed Feb 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/eip-7870.md
@kevaundray

kevaundray commented Feb 6, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

General question to this one:

Should we better treat that as "Recommended setup" or "Minimal setup"?

Minimal would be then something we can refer to and adjust to it - having any users on our support lines which will be struggling with weaker setups could be then advised to think of any improvement and referred to this EIP. Recommendation always gives quite a bit of room for complains.

Also having "Minimal supported setup" in place we can adjust any benchmarking tools to it and then make a proper assumptions.

This would be treated as "recommended" -- you can use weaker hardware but they would not be tested/benchmarked against is the thinking. The minimum is somewhat client specific, so I'd be hesitant to add that maintenance burden and it also would likely change more often per hardfork vs recommended due to the headroom.

@kevaundray kevaundray mentioned this pull request Feb 6, 2025
Closed
taxmeifyoucan
taxmeifyoucan reviewed Feb 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/eip-7870.md
taxmeifyoucan
taxmeifyoucan reviewed Feb 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/eip-7870.md Outdated
@poojaranjan poojaranjan mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2025
Closed
13 tasks
@g11tech

g11tech commented Feb 25, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

hey @kevaundray , if you could get the linter/bots to pass, we can merge this PR and then you can continually update this basis discussion and feedback

jtraglia
jtraglia reviewed Feb 25, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/eip-7870.md Outdated
@kevaundray @jtraglia
Update EIPS/eip-7870.md
d61b83b 
Co-authored-by: Justin Traglia <[email protected]>
@eth-bot eth-bot changed the title Add EIP: Hardware and Bandwidth Recommendations for Validators and Full Nodes Add EIP: Hardware and Bandwidth Recommendations Feb 27, 2025
@github-actions github-actions Bot removed the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Feb 27, 2025
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Feb 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The commit d61b83b (as a parent of 1c30144) contains errors.
Please inspect the Run Summary for details.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Feb 27, 2025
@github-actions github-actions Bot removed the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Feb 27, 2025
@kevaundray

kevaundray commented Feb 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

hey @kevaundray , if you could get the linter/bots to pass, we can merge this PR and then you can continually update this basis discussion and feedback

Should be mergeable now :)

@kevaundray

kevaundray commented Mar 10, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@g11tech bump on merging this

Marchhill
Marchhill suggested changes Mar 12, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread EIPS/eip-7870.md Outdated
Comment thread EIPS/eip-7870.md Outdated
Comment thread EIPS/eip-7870.md

### CPU

- **Single vs. Multi-thread Performance**

@Marchhill Marchhill Mar 12, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe this section could be expanded slightly, it doesn't give a clear rationale to me

g11tech
g11tech approved these changes Mar 14, 2025
View reviewed changes

@g11tech g11tech left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm for draft, whether to anchor in time via title or having it as a living EIP, that call can be taken at moving to review time

@eth-bot eth-bot enabled auto-merge (squash) March 14, 2025 15:19
eth-bot
eth-bot approved these changes Mar 14, 2025
View reviewed changes

@eth-bot eth-bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All Reviewers Have Approved; Performing Automatic Merge...

@eth-bot eth-bot merged commit 01d0d9d into ethereum:master Mar 14, 2025
@CPerezz CPerezz mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2025
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@jochem-brouwer jochem-brouwer jochem-brouwer left review comments
@eth-bot eth-bot eth-bot approved these changes
@g11tech g11tech g11tech approved these changes
+18 more reviewers
@CPerezz CPerezz CPerezz left review comments
@O1ahmad O1ahmad O1ahmad left review comments
@chfast chfast chfast left review comments
@timbeiko timbeiko timbeiko left review comments
@bomanaps bomanaps bomanaps left review comments
@potuz potuz potuz left review comments
@advaita-saha advaita-saha advaita-saha left review comments
@smartprogrammer93 smartprogrammer93 smartprogrammer93 left review comments
@jtraglia jtraglia jtraglia left review comments
@tynes tynes tynes left review comments
@kamilchodola kamilchodola kamilchodola left review comments
@dapplion dapplion dapplion left review comments
@suchapalaver suchapalaver suchapalaver left review comments
@taxmeifyoucan taxmeifyoucan taxmeifyoucan left review comments
@yorickdowne yorickdowne yorickdowne left review comments
@Marchhill Marchhill Marchhill requested changes
@tehran19r tehran19r tehran19r approved these changes
@benaadams benaadams benaadams approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

c-new Creates a brand new proposal e-consensus Waiting on editor consensus e-review Waiting on editor to review s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-informational

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.