Tezos Governance
In the Tezos blockchain, the economic protocol can be amended. Specifically, there is an on-chain mechanism to propose changes to the economic protocol, to vote for-or-against these proposed changes, and, depending on the result of the vote, to activate these changes or not.
Note that the proposal, voting and activation processes are part of the economic protocol itself. Consequently the amendment rules themselves are subject to amendments.
The rest of this page gives more details about the amendment and voting process.
The self-amendment process is split into 5 periods: Proposal Period, Exploration Vote Period, Cooldown Period, Promotion Vote Period, and Adoption Period. Each of these five periods lasts five baking cycles (i.e. 20,480 blocks or roughly 14 days, 5 hours), comprising roughly 2 months and 10 days.
Should there be any failure to proceed for a period, the whole process reverts to the Proposal Period, effectively restarting the whole process.
The amendment process consists of five periods. Each period lasts for 5 cycles (or approximately two weeks). The periods (listed below) typically succeed one to another for a total duration of approximately 2 months and a half, after which the whole amendment process starts again.
The five periods are as follows:
During this period, delegates can:
- submit protocol amendment proposals (or, simply, proposals) using the
Proposalsoperation (see below); - upvote one or several proposals, using the same
Proposalsoperation.
Each delegate can submit a maximum of 20 proposals. Duplicates count towards this total.
At the end of a proposal period, if participation reaches a proposal quorum, the proposal with most support is selected and we move to an exploration period. Note that support is measured in the cumulated staking power (expressed in mutez) that delegates supporting the proposal have. E.g., a proposal supported by a single delegate with 600,000 tz of staking power has more support than a proposal supported by two delegates with 100,000 tz each of staking power.
If there are no proposals, or a tie between two or more proposals, or if participation did not reach the proposal quorum, the process moves back to a new proposal period.
During this period delegates can cast one Yay, Nay, or Pass ballot on the selected proposal. They do so using the
Ballot operation.If the voting participation reaches quorum and there is a super-majority of Yay, the process moves to the cooldown period. (See below for details on participation, quorum, and super-majority.)
Otherwise the process moves back to the proposal period.
On-chain nothing specific happens during this period. Off-chain the delegates can read the proposal with more scrutiny, the community can discuss finer points of the proposal, the developers can perform additional tests, etc.
At the end of this period, the process moves to the promotion period.
If the voting participation reaches quorum and there is a super-majority of Yay, the process moves to the adoption period.
Otherwise the process moves back to the proposal period.
Off-chain the developers release tools that include support for the soon-to-be activated protocol, other actors (bakers, indexers, etc.) update their infrastructure to support the newly released tools, smart-contract developers start working with soon-to-be-available features, etc.
At the very end of the period, the proposal is activated. This means that the last block of the period is still interpreted by the current economic protocol, but the first block after the period is interpreted by the new economic protocol (the one that was voted in).
And a new proposal period starts.
After the activation step, the blocks added to the chain are interpreted in the newly activated protocol. As a result gas costs may differ, new operations may be available, contracts using new opcodes may be injected, etc.
Because the amendment process is also part of the economic protocol, the amendment process now unfolds according to the rules of the newly activated protocol. As a result the periods may be lengthened or shortened, a new period might be introduced, a different selection mechanism may be used, the quorum requirement might differ, etc.
When supporting a proposal or casting a Yay, Nay, or Pass ballot, each delegate has voting power equal to its stake. The stake is always measured in mutez.
Note that the stake of each delegate is computed at the beginning of each period.
As mentioned above, during either of the exploration or promotion periods, delegates can cast ballots using the
Ballot operation (see below). In both cases, delegates can cast a single Yay, Nay, or Pass ballot. A ballot has a weight equal to the delegate’s stake as detailed above.For either of these two periods, the process continues to the next period if the vote participation reaches quorum and there is a super-majority of Yay.
The vote participation is the ratio of all the cumulated stake of cast ballots (including Pass ballots) to the total stake.
For the first vote, the quorum started at 80% of stake. The quorum is adjusted after each vote as detailed below. This adjustment is necessary to ensure that the amendment process can continue even if some delegates stop participating. After each vote the new quorum is updated based on the old quorum and the vote participation with the following coefficients:
new-quorum = 0.8 × old-quorum + 0.2 × participation
However, in order to avoid establishing quorums close to 100% that would be very difficult to attain, or, conversely, low quorums close to 0% making little participation chronicle, the quorums are lower- and upper-bounded by Quorum caps.
The super-majority is reached if the cumulated stake of Yay ballots is greater than 8/10 of the cumulated stake of Yay and Nay ballots.
Note that Pass ballots do not count towards or against the super-majority; they still counts towards participation and quorum.
On the one hand, the voting part of the process revolves around the hash of a protocol. Specifically, a delegate submits a hash of a protocol, and all the delegates cast ballots on the proposed hash. The hash of a protocol is the hash of the files that constitute the source code of the protocol.
On the other hand, the protocol activation (at the end of the adoption period) revolves around the compiled sources of the protocol.
Basically, the voting process works on an identifier of the protocol whilst the activation step works on the protocol itself. Consequently, if a protocol hash is voted in and the protocol it identifies is invalid, the activation step fails.
Checking a hash is of a valid protocol:
When a hash is proposed by a delegate, it is usually accompanied by some blogposts and forum threads on community websites. These should include directions for testing the proposed protocols. If you cannot find such directions, do not hesitate to ask.
Localised failures:
It is possible that the activation step fails on a single node or a few nodes of the network, but succeed on the others. In this case the nodes with the failure are stuck, but the network as a whole continues.
The most likely cause for this is nodes that have not been updated and do not include a new protocol environment version.
If your node becomes stuck, you should start a fresh up-to-date node.
A protocol is invalid if its code cannot be compiled (e.g., if the code is not valid source code), if its code uses functions not present in the protocol environment, or if it downgrades the protocol environment version.
If an invalid protocol is voted in, then the activation fails for all the nodes, and then the chain becomes stuck. This is why it is important to vote for hashes that designate valid protocols: ones with sources that are available and that can be compiled.
There are two operations used by the delegates: proposals and ballot.
A proposals operation can only be injected during a proposal period.
Proposals : {
source: Signature.Public_key_hash.t ;
period: Voting_period_repr.t ;
proposals: Protocol_hash.t list ; }
The
source is the public key hash of the delegate, period is the unique identifier of each voting period and proposals is a non-empty list of maximum 20 protocol hashes. The operation can be submitted more than once but only as long as the cumulative length of the proposals lists is less than 20. Duplicate proposals from the same delegate are accounted for in the maximum number of proposals for that delegate. However duplicates from the same delegate are not tallied at the end of the proposal period.For example, a delegate submits a proposals operation for protocols A and B early in the proposal period, later a new protocol C is revealed and the delegate submits another proposals operation for protocols B and C. The list of submissions that will be tallied is [A,B,C].
A ballot operation can only be submitted during periods where a vote happens (e.g. exploration, promotion), and only once per period.
Ballot : {
source: Signature.Public_key_hash.t ;
period: Voting_period_repr.t ;
proposal: Protocol_hash.t ;
ballot: Vote_repr.ballot ; }
The fields
source and period are the same as above, while proposal is the currently selected proposal and ballot is one of Yay, Nay or Pass. The Pass vote allows a delegate to contribute towards the quorum without contributing towards the super-majority. This is important because, as detailed above, the quorum is adaptive and that low participation would lower the quorum of the next vote.More details on the operations can be found in src/proto_013_PtJakart/lib_protocol/operation_repr.ml. The binary format is described by
tezos-client describe unsigned operation.
The Octez client,
tezos-client, provides commands for basic exploration and interaction with the amendment and voting process.
Tezos’ client provides a command to show the status of a voting period. It displays different information for different kind of periods, as in the following samples:
$ tezos-client show voting period
Current period: "proposal"
Blocks remaining until end of period: 59
Current proposals:
PsNa6jTtsRfbGaNSoYXNTNM5A7c3Lji22Yf2ZhpFUjQFC17iZVp 2,400,000 ꜩ
$ tezos-client show voting period
Current period: "exploration"
Blocks remaining until end of period: 63
Current proposal: PsNa6jTtsRfbGaNSoYXNTNM5A7c3Lji22Yf2ZhpFUjQFC17iZVp
Ballots:
Yay: 2,400,000 ꜩ
Nay: 0 ꜩ
Pass: 0 ꜩ
Current participation 20.00%, necessary quorum 80.00%
Current in favor 2,400,000 ꜩ, needed supermajority 1,920,000 ꜩ
$ tezos-client show voting period
Current period: "cooldown"
Blocks remaining until end of period: 64
Current proposal: PsNa6jTtsRfbGaNSoYXNTNM5A7c3Lji22Yf2ZhpFUjQFC17iZVp
It should be noted that the ballot number 2,400,000 ꜩ above is the stake counted in mutez (displayed in tez). The proposal has a total stake of 2,400,000 ꜩ, which may come from a single ballot from a delegate having a staking balance of 2,400,000 ꜩ or it may come from multiple ballots from delegates with a combined stake of 2,400,000 ꜩ.
During a proposal period, a list of proposals can be submitted with:
tezos-client submit proposals for <delegate> <proposal1> <proposal2> ...
Remember that each delegate can submit a maximum of 20 protocol hashes and that duplicates count towards this total. Moreover each proposal is accepted only if it meets one of the following two conditions:
- the protocol hash was already proposed on the network. In this case we can submit an additional proposal that “upvotes” an existing one and our staking power are added to the ones already supporting the proposal.
- the protocol is known by the node. In particular the first proposer of a protocol should be able to successfully inject the protocol in its node which performs some checks, compiles and loads the protocol.
These are protection measures that the Octez client takes to prevent the accidental injection of invalid protocols. As mentioned above, it is still important to check the validity of the protocols that you vote for as they may have been injected via different means.
During either of the exploration or promotion periods, ballots can be submitted once with:
tezos-client submit ballot for <delegate> <proposal> <yay|nay|pass>
Further details and explanations on the voting procedure can be found at:
Last modified 1yr ago