Optimizing Exit Queues for Proof-Of-Stake Blockchains: A Mechanism Design Approach

Authors Michael Neuder, Mallesh Pai , Max Resnick



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.AFT.2024.20.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.21 MB
  • 22 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Michael Neuder
  • Ethereum Foundation, New York, NY, USA
Mallesh Pai
  • Special Mechanisms Group, Consensys Inc, Dallas, TX, USA
  • Rice University, Houston, TX, USA
Max Resnick
  • Special Mechanisms Group, Consensys Inc, Dallas, TX, USA

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Aditya Asgaonkar, Vitalik Buterin, Francesco D’Amato, Barnabé Monnot, and Tim Roughgarden for helpful discussions.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Michael Neuder, Mallesh Pai, and Max Resnick. Optimizing Exit Queues for Proof-Of-Stake Blockchains: A Mechanism Design Approach. In 6th Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies (AFT 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 316, pp. 20:1-20:22, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.AFT.2024.20

Abstract

Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus protocols have provable safety and liveness properties for static validator sets. In practice, however, the validator set changes over time, potentially eroding the protocol’s security guarantees. For example, systems with accountable safety may lose some of that accountability over time as adversarial validators exit. As a result, protocols must rate limit entry and exit so that the set changes slowly enough to ensure security. Here, the system designer faces a fundamental trade-off. The harder it is to exit the system, the less attractive staking becomes; alternatively, the easier it is to exit the system, the less secure the protocol will be. This paper provides the first systematic study of exit queues for Proof-of-Stake blockchains. Given a collection of validator-set consistency constraints imposed by the protocol, the social planner’s goal is to provide a constrained-optimal mechanism that minimizes disutility for the participants. We introduce the MINSLACK mechanism, a dynamic capacity first-come-first-served queue in which the amount of stake that can exit in a period depends on the number of previous exits and the consistency constraints. We show that MINSLACK is optimal when stakers equally value the processing of their withdrawal. When stakers values are heterogeneous, the optimal mechanism resembles a priority queue with dynamic capacity. However, this mechanism must reserve exit capacity for the future in case a staker with a much higher need for liquidity arrives. We conclude with a survey of known consistency constraints and highlight the diversity of existing exit mechanisms.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Information systems
Keywords
  • Mechanism Design
  • Market Design
  • Accountable Safety
  • Proof-of-Stake
  • Blockchain

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Aditya Ansgaonkar. Weak subjectivity in ethereum 2.0, 2020. URL: https://notes.ethereum.org/@adiasg/weak-subjectvity-eth2.
  2. Aditya Asgaonkar, Francesco D'Amato, Roberto Saltini, Luca Zanolini, and Chenyi Zhang. A confirmation rule for the ethereum consensus protocol. arXiv preprint, 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.00549.
  3. Avalanche-Documentation. How to stake on avalanche, 2024. URL: https://docs.avax.network/nodes/validate/how-to-stake.
  4. Beacon-Chain-Specifications. Phase 0 - the beacon chain, 2020. URL: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/blob/dev/specs/phase0/beacon-chain.md.
  5. Dirk Bergemann and Juuso Välimäki. The dynamic pivot mechanism. Econometrica, 78(2):771-789, 2010. Google Scholar
  6. Gavin Birch. The staking module, 2020. URL: https://github.com/gavinly/CosmosParametersWiki /blob/master/Staking.md#1-unbondingtime.
  7. Lorenz Breidenbach, Christian Cachin, Benedict Chan, Alex Coventry, Steve Ellis, Ari Juels, Farinaz Koushanfar, Andrew Miller, Brendan Magauran, Daniel Moroz, et al. Chainlink 2.0: Next steps in the evolution of decentralized oracle networks, 2021. Google Scholar
  8. Eric Budish, Andrew Lewis-Pye, and Tim Roughgarden. The economic limits of permissionless consensus. arXiv e-prints, 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.09173.
  9. Vitalik Buterin. Proof of stake: How i learned to love weak subjectivity. 2014, 2014. URL: https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/25/proof-stake-learned-love-weak-subjectivity.
  10. Vitalik Buterin. Suggested average-case improvements to reduce capital costs of being a casper validator, 2018. URL: https://ethresear.ch/t/suggested-average-case-improvements-to-reduce-capital-costs-of-being-a-casper-validator/3844.
  11. Vitalik Buterin. Rate-limiting entry/exits, not withdrawals, 2019. URL: https://ethresear.ch/t/rate-limiting-entry-exits-not-withdrawals/4942.
  12. Vitalik Buterin. Weak subjectivity under the exit queue model, 2019. URL: https://ethresear.ch/t/weak-subjectivity-under-the-exit-queue-model/5187.
  13. Vitalik Buterin. Vitalik’s annotated ethereum 2.0 spec, 2020. URL: https://github.com/ethereum/annotated-spec/blob/master/phase0/beacon-chain.md.
  14. Vitalik Buterin and Virgil Griffith. Casper the friendly finality gadget. arXiv preprint, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.09437.
  15. Capella-Specifications. Capella - the beacon chain, 2023. URL: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/blob/dev/specs/capella/beacon-chain.md.
  16. Cardano-Undelegation. Cardano (ada) undelegation period, 2023. URL: https://p2p.org/faq/en/articles/5253938-cardano-ada-undelegation-period.
  17. Chainlink-Docs. Introducing the chainlink staking platform: v0.2 upgrade and launch details, 2024. URL: https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-staking-v0-2-overview/#unbonding_mechanism.
  18. Tarun Chitra. Competitive equilibria between staking and on-chain lending. CryptoEcononmic Systems (CES), 2021. Google Scholar
  19. Cosmos-Staking-Module. x/staking, 2023. URL: https://docs.cosmos.network/v0.47/build/modules/staking.
  20. Soubhik Deb, Robert Raynor, and Sreeram Kannan. Stakesure: Proof of stake mechanisms with strong cryptoeconomic safety, 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.05797.
  21. EigenLabs. Eigen: The universal intersubjective work token, 2024. URL: https://github.com/Layr-Labs/whitepaper/blob/master/EIGEN_Token_Whitepaper.pdf.
  22. EigenLayer-Documentation. Escrow period (withdrawal delay), 2023. URL: https://docs.eigenlayer.xyz/eigenlayer/restaking-guides/restaking-user-guide/#escrow-period-withdrawal-delay.
  23. Sam Hart and Max Einhorn. Building a liquid restaking token from first principles, 2024. URL: https://timewave.computer/liquid-restaking-token.
  24. Gur Huberman, Jacob D Leshno, and Ciamac Moallemi. Monopoly without a monopolist: An economic analysis of the bitcoin payment system. The Review of Economic Studies, 88(6):3011-3040, 2021. Google Scholar
  25. Oisin Kyne. Eip-7002: Execution layer triggerable exits, 2023. URL: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip-7002-execution-layer-triggerable-exits/14195/6.
  26. Ron Lavi and Noam Nisan. Competitive analysis of incentive compatible on-line auctions. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pages 233-241, 2000. Google Scholar
  27. Jacob D Leshno. Dynamic matching in overloaded waiting lists. American Economic Review, 112(12):3876-3910, 2022. Google Scholar
  28. Andrew Lewis-Pye and Tim Roughgarden. Permissionless consensus, 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.14701.
  29. dApp Lion and Tim Bieko. Eip-7514: Add max epoch churn limit, 2023. URL: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-7514.
  30. Joachim Neu, Ertem Nusret Tas, and David Tse. Short paper: Accountable safety implies finality. Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2023. Google Scholar
  31. Noam Nisan. Serial monopoly on blockchains, 2023. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.12731.
  32. Mallesh Pai and Max Resnick. Dynamic transaction fee mechanism design. arXiv preprint, 2023. Google Scholar
  33. David C Parkes and Satinder Singh. An mdp-based approach to online mechanism design. Advances in neural information processing systems, 16, 2003. Google Scholar
  34. Polkadot-Validator-Guide. Run a validator (polkadot), 2024. URL: https://wiki.polkadot.network/docs/maintain-guides-how-to-validate-polkadot.
  35. Polygon-Knowledge-Layer. How to delegate, 2023. URL: https://docs.polygon.technology/pos/how-to/delegate/#unbond-from-a-validator.
  36. Potuz. Withdrawals without queues, 2022. URL: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/3068.
  37. Tim Roughgarden. Transaction fee mechanism design for the ethereum blockchain: An economic analysis of eip-1559. arXiv preprint, 2020. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.00854.
  38. Tim Roughgarden. Transaction fee mechanism design. ACM SIGecom Exchanges, 19(1):52-55, 2021. Google Scholar
  39. Solana-Documentation. Delegation timing considerations, 2023. URL: https://solana.com/staking#delegation-timing-considerations.
  40. Xuanming Su and Stefanos A Zenios. Recipient choice can address the efficiency-equity trade-off in kidney transplantation: A mechanism design model. Management science, 52(11):1647-1660, 2006. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail