Multiple customers (“multi-client paradigm”) Ethereum 2.0 is one of the main reasons why the startup process takes so much time. This may 13 in the online Consensus conference: Distributed said the lead developer of Ethereum 2.0 Danny Ryan.
Team Ethereum 2.0 has repeatedly postponed the launch of the zero phase Ethereum 2.0. Originally the launch was scheduled for 13 January, but at the last moment it was postponed. Since then, developers have called the different timing of the launch of the network. In March, the researcher Ethereum Foundation Justin Drake said that the target launch date is 30 July (5th anniversary Ethereum). Africa Sedon said that the launch will be the end of the year or in 2021. This week Coindesk, citing a review Vitalik Buterin reported that the Ethereum 2.0 will be launched in July, but later he Buterin denied this information on Twitter.
Yeah, I didn’t say “July”. Perhaps the question containing the word “July” but I did not hear the July, when asked.
The amount of work still to be done, raised doubts that the launch will take place in this period. For example, Ethereum Foundation has not yet launched the official test network, which, according to developers, should work without interruption for two months.
Currently, there are seven client implementations of Ethereum 2.0: Trinity from the Ethereum Foundation, Prysm from Prysmatic Labs, Lighthouse from Sigma Prime, Nimbus from Status ChainSafe from Lodestar, Teku from PegaSys and Cortex from Nethermind.
Ryan called the Lighthouse “the most effective customer to date” terms of speed and security. At the same time Prysmatic Labs launched the largest test network with one client, which includes more than 400 nodes.
According to Ryan, the presence of multiple clients is extremely important to support a high level of security in the network. “If one customer has a critical error and it crashes, the network can continue to work, because most of the gcd will not work on this client”.
According to Ryan, the history of the current network Ethereum justifies this approach. The vulnerability was in a client Geth and client Parity, but the underlying network could continue working.
On the other hand, this approach requires more time for implementation. “Multi-client paradigm introduces additional complexity,” he said. “If we had one client, perhaps we would have launched the main network”.