Cartesi Validator Marketplace

Technical Vision Forum
1

Sunodo is a core company in the Cartesi ecosystem that has been focused on building Sunodo CLI (soon to be called Cartesi CLI), a convenience platform that allows for ease of creation and deployment of Cartesi dApps. Sunodo is also preparing to act as the first professional validator service in the Cartesi ecosystem for dApps and users who don’t want to run their own validator nodes.

Validators play a key role in the Cartesi ecosystem, responsible for ensuring that the results of off-chain computation on Cartesi are valid before they’re added to the underlying blockchain.

In addition to building its own validator service, Sunodo currently has a well-documented process under development for any aspiring validator to become a validator node provider through a validator marketplace. Under this process, any developer deploying a dApp through the deploy function of the Cartesi CLI can choose any existing validator service provider in the marketplace as the dApp’s validator authority. Under the current contemplated marketplace setup, each service provider currently has the flexibility to set its own billing terms (price, currency type, etc.). More information about the current unreleased implementation is at Becoming a Validator | Sunodo and Billing system | Sunodo

Sunodo would like to propose that the current marketplace can form the basis of, and be converted into, a community-governed Cartesi Validator Marketplace that connects dApps being deployed through Cartesi CLI with available validator service providers who are part of the marketplace. Notably, this marketplace could enforce a single currency for all validators (i.e. CTSI) and also implement a revenue-sharing model for a portion of marketplace fees to fund ecosystem initiatives.

With that, the Sunodo team would like to invite public discussion on the community’s appetite for such a Cartesi marketplace. If there is indeed a desire to see this move forward, Sunodo would like to invite discussion on the following items that would need to be settled in order to transform the current Sunodo marketplace into a Cartesi marketplace along the lines described above:

(1) Setting a single token as the payment currency for validators who join a marketplace;

(2) Discussing and setting parameters and on-chain mechanism for validator revenue share;

(3) Discussing and implementing fee-setting rules (e.g. marketplace sets fee vs. flexibility to compete in the marketplace on fee).

(4) Discussing and setting enforceable on-chain parameters for being listed as a ValidatorNodeProvider in the marketplace (e.g. can’t be listed if you don’t subscribe to all marketplace parameters);

(5) Discussing hosting and maintenance of the front-end for Cartesi CLI deploy (essentially marketplace front-end)

(6) Discussing inter-unit maintenance of the marketplace (e.g. front-end maintenance, blockchain team, Sunodo team, etc.)

(7) Discussing the possibility for the marketplace support the addition of templates as value-added services that could be provided by node runners as well as by developers (e.g. specific settings of Cartesi VM and/or the validator Node, multiple protocol integrations, etc)

6 Likes
2

This is an exciting proposal and here are my initial thoughts:

(1) Setting a single token as the payment currency for validators who join a marketplace;

I enjoy the idea of having CTSI as the means of payment for validators. It supports a flywheel effect in the ecosystem that ends up being beneficial to validators themselves in the long run.

(2) Discussing and setting parameters and on-chain mechanisms for validator revenue share;

I would love to see a minimum donation from validators participating in the marketplace, with a percentage to be defined and adjustable through a voting mechanism. Like the previous proposal about payment in CTSI, this also propels the development of the ecosystem.

(3) Discussing and implementing fee-setting rules (e.g., marketplace sets fee vs. flexibility to compete in the marketplace on fee).

I don’t have a preference at this point. I would like to read others’ arguments for these options.

(4) Discussing and setting enforceable on-chain parameters for being listed as a ValidatorNodeProvider in the marketplace (e.g., can’t be listed if you don’t subscribe to all marketplace parameters);

I think it’s important to set (1) and (2) above as enforceable parameters for a provider to partake in the marketplace. Although Cartesi is open-source and anyone is free to run nodes as they wish, Sunodo is setting a great example by pioneering this initiative and following the rules discussed here.

The decision to enter the marketplace with its rules works as a commitment of partners to accelerate the Cartesi ecosystem toward fruition. All that being said, aside from the indirect benefits that validator services will have with a richer ecosystem, it’s possible to conceive and discuss extra benefits for service providers following the rules. For instance, better technical support, node running subsidies, or other possibilities that can be discussed in the forum.

(5) Discussing hosting and maintenance of the front-end for Cartesi CLI deploy (essentially marketplace front-end)

I see the marketplace front-end with a domain owned by the Foundation (it could be a cartesi.io subdomain, similar to explorer.cartesi.io). When it comes to the maintenance of the service (i.e., hosting, troubleshooting, upgrades), we need to get into trust assumptions, risks, and transparency to users.

(6) Discussing inter-unit maintenance of the marketplace (e.g., front-end maintenance, blockchain team, Sunodo team, etc.)

It makes sense to let collaborators and units express their desire to maintain the different parts of the system.

(7) Discussing the possibility for the marketplace to support the addition of templates as value-added services that could be provided by node runners as well as by developers (e.g., specific settings of Cartesi VM and/or the validator Node, multiple protocol integrations, etc.)

If I understand this correctly, I believe this discussion will be simpler when Sunodo or someone proposes a framework first.

2 Likes
3

Erick, your understanding is correct and aligned with mine. Although further marketplace functions, to fully explore Cartesi protocol stack modularity and flexibility (including at VM level) we first need an initial version of the marketplace, for them continue improving its functionalities

1 Like
4

I am in favor of incorporating a stake requirement as part of the criteria for being listed as a ValidatorNodeProvider in the marketplace. This stake requirement could serve as a commitment mechanism, ensuring that those listed have a interest in the integrity and security of the network. By requiring validators to stake a certain amount of $CTSI, we can incentivize responsible behavior and discourage malicious actors. It’s not much different from proof-of-stake.

2 Likes
5

Hey, after debating with a few people about this idea of a Validator Marketplace, we came to the conclusion that it’s a much harder problem than it initially looks like.

It seems to me that it’s a better strategy to start from the much simpler reader node:

And wait until we understand the problem better, and also understand the dave bond/stake dynamics better too.

ps: not saying that this isnt a laudable goal, just arguing that it might be too complicated/unknown for us to focus on tackling now

1 Like