Open
Conversation
|
@rkapka is attempting to deploy a commit to the Offchain Labs - AF Billed Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
|
|
rkapka
commented
Feb 11, 2026
|
|
||
| - Challenge-bonds, per level: 555 `WETH` at the "big-step" level; 79 `WETH` at the "small-step" level - required from validators to open challenges against an assertion observed on the parent chain (Ethereum, in the case of Arbitrum One), for each level. Note that “level” corresponds to the level of granularity over which the interactive bisection game gets played, starting at the block level, moving on to a range of <a data-quicklook-from="wasm">WASM</a> execution steps, and then finally to the level of a single execution step. For more details on the concept of "levels" in BoLD challenges, see [Challenge resolution](/how-arbitrum-works/bold/bold-technical-deep-dive.mdx#challenge-resolution) section in the Technical deep dive. | ||
|
|
||
| We calculated these values carefully to optimize for the resource ratio (explained later) and gas costs in the event of an attack, as described in [BoLD whitepaper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.10491). This effectively means that an entity that has already posted a bond to propose an assertion does not need to post a separate assertion bond to challenge an invalid state assertion that they observe. To be clear, the validator would still require 555 `ETH` and 79 `ETH` for ongoing challenges. These additional challenge bond amounts are required to participate in the interactive dispute game (back and forth) and narrow down the disagreement to a single step of execution that can be proven on Ethereum. The 555 `ETH` and 79 `ETH` challenge bonds can accumulate via a trustless bonding pool, and do not all have to be provided by the validator that initiated the challenge. These bonds are refundable at the end of a challenge and can also be assembled by the community using a trustless bonding pool. |
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The removed part is already mentioned in the preceding sentence
rkapka
commented
Feb 11, 2026
|
|
||
| In the STF, transactions follow a structured workflow: ArbOS first validates format and funds, then charges gas for Layer 2 execution and Layer 1 posting. Geth executes per EVM standards, after which ArbOS updates states and cross-chain elements, generating receipts and logs to conclude the process. For technical details about ArbOS, refer to the [ArbOS deep dive documentation](/how-arbitrum-works/deep-dives/arbos.mdx). | ||
|
|
||
| <ImageWithCaption caption="Geth sandwich" src="/img/haw-geth-sandwich.svg" /> |
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe the image was different in the past, but Geth is not "sandwitched" because it's not in the middle
rkapka
commented
Feb 11, 2026
| 1. Soft finality emerges immediately upon the inclusion of the Sequencer feed, offering instant acceptance feedback, a commitment to order, and the ability to act without wait times—as noted in the submission phase. This soft finality" relies on the Sequencer's trustworthiness for usability but lacks cryptographic backing. | ||
| 1. Soft finality emerges immediately upon the inclusion of the Sequencer feed, offering instant acceptance feedback, a commitment to order, and the ability to act without wait times—as noted in the submission phase. This "soft finality" relies on the Sequencer's trustworthiness for usability but lacks cryptographic backing. | ||
|
|
||
| 2. Hard finality, conversely, solidifies when the batch posts and confirms on Ethereum, inheriting its consensus security, ensuring public data availability, and making the transaction irreversible. This process typically spans 10-20 minutes, varying with Ethereum block times and batch frequency. Hard finality depends on rollup assertions being confirmed on Ethereum; for more on how assertions work, see the [Assertions deep dive](/how-arbitrum-works/deep-dives/assertions.mdx). |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.