Housefire Testnet Post-upgrade Checklist

Mainnet Ops
1

Thanks to everyone who participated in the Housefire testnet upgrade to v101.0.0 of Namada.

I want to provide a checklist of items to test to ensure that the network is behaving properly.

Reminder of the six current IBC channels that are active and their precision numbers that have been written to storage:

  • OSMO: transfer/channel-7/uosmo – 4500
  • ATOM: transfer/channel-9/uatom - 6000
  • TIA: transfer/channel-10/utia – 6000
  • stOSMO: transfer/channel-8/stuosmo – 4500
  • stATOM: transfer/channel-8/stuatom – 6000
  • stTIA: transfer/channel-8/stutia – 6000

Testing Action Items:

  • Ensure that shielded-sync is working
  • Check that an account with an IBC token of amount larger than precision (in micro-units) accrues NAM rewards
  • Check that an address with one IBC token with amount (in micro-units) less than the precision does not accrue NAM rewards
  • Check that unshielding, shielding, and shielded transfer work and balances update properly
  • Check that gas payment with all tokens still works as expected
  • Check that IBC out of and into Namada works both transparent and shielded addresses still
  • Ensure that all proof-of-stake functionality and transactions still work
  • All of the above functionality works via the CLI and Namadillo

Other notes

  • Please also submit feedback in this thread for how the hard-fork process and instructions could be improved for the mainnet upgrade.
  • Reminder that all previously existing NAM rewards before the hard-fork are no longer accessible. Your shielded accounts should have started accruing NAM rewards from scratch after the hard fork.

Thanks everyone!

10 Likes
2

Awesome !!

I think housefire HF went super smooth . Especially the validator nodes.

One thing maybe I would mention is to have a date (or block height) locked in at least 2 weeks in advance and set it in stone unless there’s an urgent need to postpone it as we approach it.

Also, revisit/discuss ideas to speed up the indexer/events migration during “down” time.

1 Like
3

Luminara would like to put a 10k NAM bounty on Brent’s request.

Edit: Bounty is for performing and documenting a suite of tests. There would be another reward if a problem is found.

Also, a reminder about why Housefire :derelict_house::fire: is here! A lot of info is outdated, but there’s still an 80k NAM bounty for knocking over Housefire: https://knowabl.notion.site/Housefire-canary-net-0a0d670d5dad412ea5715fcc97b9433d?pvs=4

1 Like
4

@Gavin what does the bounty entail exactly? For finding a problem or for performing and documenting a suite of tests?

1 Like
5

Performing and documenting a suite of tests. There would be another reward if a problem is found.

6

anyone up for fulfilling @brentstone’s request? ie. testing & documenting the items on his checklist

we’re increasing the bounty to 15k NAM :person_lifting_weights: lfg!

7

Awesome work, team :clap: The hard fork executed flawlessly and all services are stable. I’ve upgraded the Namadillo UI to v1.20.0 and it’s performing great. Next, I’ll run through the Testing Action Items in Namadillo and propose some doc improvements for the mainnet hard-fork upgrade. Fuzz/halt tests are underway, and the chain is rock-solid :gem_stone: Let’s push forward to the mainnet upgrade and gear up for Housefire Phase 5. LFG!

2 Likes
8

Amazing!

Please keep us posted, @papadritta?

1 Like
9

Hi

Thought I would take a stab and some of the tests. Did some, shared some test results with @Gavin & @brentstone

Hope it helps.

Thanks

4 Likes
10

wow :star_struck: :raising_hands:

looks pretty amazing to me–i will alert @brentstone to review asap

11

Hi

Just posting a link to our current testing results. Can be viewed here

Testing results show Namadillo not working at it’s best. @brentstone and team already working on to resolve Namadilo errors and provide new release with fixes.

Thanks

2 Likes
12

Hi @Gavin @brentstone

Did a 2nd round of testing after Namadillo was updated.

See feedback here

Thanks

1 Like
13

amazing! @Shez-Staking4All, this is very helpful, wow :star_struck:

just looking through now. do you know how the ibc channel is being selected for Celestia? i think the Celestia shielded all deposits failed because it’s not an active channel

image
image1092×222 18.6 KB

image
image1920×952 99.2 KB

image
image2560×1440 403 KB

14

Yes, I suspect the channel is not active. Think this is part of @brentstone frustration from yellow circle due to keeping house fire things running

But note we used the same commands as previous testing. So this was a success in previous tests. Uses channel-72

for example this transaction worked in previous tests for channel-72

Now fails as seen here

I am not sure how namadillo is choosing. but fails on cli for same channel.