docs: add "General" section (networks, contracts, NeuroWeb, whitepaper/RFC, random sampling) + relocate General Bug Bounty#1207
docs: add "General" section (networks, contracts, NeuroWeb, whitepaper/RFC, random sampling) + relocate General Bug Bounty#1207Bojan131 wants to merge 6 commits into
Conversation
…r/RFC, random sampling) + move General Bug Bounty Restores reference/resource pages that were in the old docs (dkg-node/docs) but missing from the V10 docs, grouped under a new "General" section lower in the menu: - Networks & RPCs — chain IDs, RPC URLs, explorers for Base/Gnosis/NeuroWeb (mainnet + testnet) - Contract addresses — Hub entry point + pointer to packages/evm-module/deployments - NeuroWeb & bridging TRAC — chain overview, NEURO, Snowbridge, add-TRAC-to-wallet - Whitepaper & RFCs — links + OT-RFC process - Random Sampling — refreshed high-level for V10 (proof-of-knowledge; conviction rewards) Also moves General Bug Bounty out of "Active Now" into the new "General" section (per maintainer request). Note: this changes its URL from /active-now/general-bug-bounty to /general/general-bug-bounty. Networks/contract data verified against packages/evm-module/deployments and the old published networks table; SDK/RAGAS pages intentionally NOT re-added (dropped in V10). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Codex review produced 2 comment(s) but all targeted lines outside the diff and were dropped. Check the workflow logs for details.
|
|
||
| | Network | RPC URL | Chain ID | Gas token | Block explorer | | ||
| | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | ||
| | Base | `https://mainnet.base.org` | 8453 | ETH | https://basescan.org | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The new current docs present Base/Gnosis/NeuroWeb as usable DKG Mainnet networks, but the checked-in network/mainnet-*.json files all say pre-deployment and do not contain a hubAddress. The runtime requires both rpcUrl and hubAddress, and packages/evm-module/deployments has no mainnet deployment files to supply one. Following this table would leave operators with non-functional mainnet configuration; mark these entries as pending/pre-deployment or add the deployed Hub/config before publishing them as current.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This states that DKG V10 runs on Base, Gnosis, and NeuroWeb mainnet, but the bundled runtime configs for all three mainnets are still marked pre-deployment and contain no hubAddress (network/mainnet-base.json, network/mainnet-gnosis.json, network/mainnet-neuroweb.json). Only network/testnet.json is currently usable with a Hub address. As written, node operators/publishers can select a documented mainnet and end up with a config that cannot resolve or call the DKG contracts. Either mark these as planned/pre-deployment or add the actual deployed Hub/config data before saying the networks are live.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The DKG Testnet table advertises Gnosis Chiado and NeuroWeb Testnet as usable DKG testnets, but this branch only ships a Base Sepolia testnet config/faucet (network/testnet.json is base:84532) and the deployments folder only contains base_sepolia_v10_contracts.json. A user following “pick the network” can configure an RPC/chain ID with no published V10 Hub or test-TRAC path in these docs, so publishing/staking will fail. Please either remove these rows or mark them explicitly as not deployed until matching Hub/token/faucet/deployment entries exist.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This section presents Base, Gnosis, and NeuroWeb as current “DKG Mainnet” networks, but the checked-in mainnet network files are still marked pre-deployment and do not contain Hub addresses. That conflicts with contract-addresses.md, which says mainnet V10 Hub addresses will appear as networks go live. As written, operators may treat these as live DKG V10 deployment targets even though the node config cannot actually connect to a V10 Hub on those chains yet. Please gate this table with deployment status, or move undeployed networks to a planned/upcoming section.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The RPC/chain-id tables duplicate runtime network metadata from network/mainnet-base.json, network/mainnet-gnosis.json, network/mainnet-neuroweb.json, and network/testnet.json. These values are operationally mutable, and keeping them in independent Markdown tables increases drift risk as endpoints or launch status changes. Consider making the network JSON files canonical from the docs, or adding a small generated docs artifact/check so the published table cannot diverge from the configs users actually run.
| | Base Sepolia (testnet) | Token (TRAC) | `0x2A58BdD13176D85906D804cdbFFA0D9119282DC8` | | ||
|
|
||
| {% hint style="info" %} | ||
| For the full set of contracts on each network (Staking, Conviction, Random Sampling, ParametersStorage, …) and for mainnet addresses, use the [deployments folder](https://github.com/OriginTrail/dkg/tree/main/packages/evm-module/deployments) as the source of truth — it is updated with every deployment. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This page delegates mainnet addresses to packages/evm-module/deployments, but that folder currently only contains base_sepolia_v10_contracts.json, localhost_contracts.json, and parameters.json. That makes the claimed source of truth incomplete for the new General docs section: readers have no mainnet deployment files to follow, and future maintainers have no obvious place to update those addresses. Either add the mainnet deployment files in the same change or scope this wording to the networks that actually exist in the deployments folder.
The validation source this note points readers to does not currently contain mainnet deployment evidence. The only checked-in *_contracts.json files under packages/evm-module/deployments are base_sepolia_v10_contracts.json and localhost_contracts.json, while network/mainnet-*.json are still marked pre-deployment and have no hubAddress. Either add/validate the mainnet deployment files or scope this note to the networks that actually have deployment metadata.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The page says the deployments folder contains the full V10 deployment set, one file per network, and later points users there for mainnet contract addresses. In this PR/worktree that folder only has base_sepolia_v10_contracts.json, localhost_contracts.json, and parameters.json; there are no Base/Gnosis/NeuroWeb mainnet deployment artifacts. This makes the documented source of truth unusable for the exact mainnet addresses the page tells operators to find there.
The cited validation source does not contain the claimed per-network deployment files. In this branch packages/evm-module/deployments only has base_sepolia_v10_contracts.json, localhost_contracts.json, and parameters.json, so the statement that it has one file per network and is the source of truth for mainnet contract addresses is not verifiable from committed artifacts. Add the missing deployment files or narrow the wording to the networks actually present.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Issue: This page is marked current and tells users that the full V10 deployment set lives in packages/evm-module/deployments as one file per network, but the repository currently only contains Base Sepolia and localhost deployment JSONs, while the mainnet network configs are still marked pre-deployment with no hubAddress. Integrators following this as the source of truth cannot resolve Gnosis/NeuroWeb/mainnet deployments. Either add the missing canonical deployment files or scope the wording to the deployments that actually exist.
The new docs tell readers to use packages/evm-module/deployments as the canonical source for the full V10 deployment set, but this PR does not add deployment artifacts for the newly documented mainnet networks or the Base mainnet Hub address. The repository currently only has base_sepolia_v10_contracts.json, localhost_contracts.json, and parameters.json, so the address table cannot be validated against the claimed source of truth. Please add the missing deployment JSON files or change the text to point at a source that actually contains these addresses.
| | Network | RPC URL | Chain ID | Gas token | Block explorer | | ||
| | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | ||
| | Base Sepolia | `https://sepolia.base.org` | 84532 | ETH | https://sepolia.basescan.org | | ||
| | Gnosis Chiado | `https://rpc.chiadochain.net` | 10200 | xDAI | https://blockscout.chiadochain.net | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These testnet rows are not backed by the checked-in node or Hardhat network configs. network/testnet.json points only to Base Sepolia, and packages/evm-module/hardhat.node.config.ts defines base_sepolia_v10 but no Chiado or NeuroWeb testnet network. If Chiado and NeuroWeb testnet are supported DKG V10 targets, add matching config or validation evidence; otherwise mark them as external/unconfigured endpoints.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The DKG Testnet table lists Gnosis Chiado and NeuroWeb Testnet, but the committed runtime config only has network/testnet.json for Base Sepolia and there are no corresponding Gnosis Chiado/NeuroWeb deployment files under packages/evm-module/deployments. That leaves these rows without local validation evidence; add matching config/deployment artifacts or mark them as external/reference-only rather than active DKG testnet entries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This section presents Gnosis Chiado and NeuroWeb Testnet as DKG V10 testnet choices, but the repository currently only ships a usable V10 testnet config for Base Sepolia (network/testnet.json, with Hub 0xC056... and faucet mode v10_base_sepolia). There are no Chiado/NeuroWeb testnet Hub deployments or network configs in this PR, and contract-addresses.md only lists Base Sepolia for testnet protocol contracts. Users following this table can pick a chain where the DKG contracts/faucet are not actually available. Either remove those rows or clearly mark them as chain references/future targets until V10 testnet deployments exist.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The new DKG Testnet table adds Gnosis Chiado and NeuroWeb Testnet as usable DKG testnet entries, but the repo-backed validation artifacts only cover Base Sepolia: network/testnet.json points to Base Sepolia, packages/evm-module/deployments has no Chiado/NeuroWeb V10 contracts file, and the new contract-addresses page has no Hub for those networks. Please either label these as chain RPC references until deployment artifacts exist, or add the matching V10 Hub/token deployment metadata so the rows can be validated.
|
|
||
| | Network | Contract | Address | | ||
| | --- | --- | --- | | ||
| | Base Sepolia (testnet) | Hub | `0xC056e67Da4F51377Ad1B01f50F655fFdcCD809F6` | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The table copies the Hub and Token addresses out of the deployment JSON while the same page says the deployments folder is the canonical, always-up-to-date source. This creates a second manual update point for volatile deployment metadata. Prefer linking directly to the deployment file or generating this snippet from it so the docs cannot drift from the canonical data.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This page hard-codes live token and Hub addresses while also saying the deployments folder is the source of truth. That creates competing sources that will drift whenever contracts are redeployed or additional networks go live; the same pattern appears in docs/general/networks.md for RPC metadata that already exists under network/*.json. Consider generating these tables from the deployment/network JSON files, or avoid copying exact values and link readers directly to the authoritative artifacts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Hub address table turns this Markdown page into a second deployment registry. It duplicates the Base Sepolia Hub already stored in packages/evm-module/deployments/base_sepolia_v10_contracts.json, and the new Base mainnet Hub is not backed by any deployment file in the current deployments directory. Since the same section says deployments are the source of truth, future redeployments or mainnet activation will require manual synchronization across docs and machine-readable metadata. Prefer publishing the relevant deployment JSONs first, or generating/linking this table from those files.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Issue: The new Base mainnet Hub address is hardcoded only in Markdown, while the page also says the canonical deployment data lives in packages/evm-module/deployments and that there is one file per network. In this tree that folder only contains Base Sepolia and localhost artifacts, so this creates a second, unverifiable source of truth for deployment addresses and makes future updates easy to miss. Add the Base mainnet deployment artifact or generate/narrow this table from the artifact source.
… + Base/Gnosis bridging Per review feedback: - Contract addresses: add a TRAC token address table for Base, Gnosis, NeuroWeb (mainnet) and Base Sepolia + NeuroWeb (testnet), sourced from the canonical dkg-evm-module deployments + V10 evm-module/deployments. Testnet note points to the deployments folder as the source of truth (V10 redeploys test contracts). - Bridging: rename the NeuroWeb page to "Bridging TRAC" covering all three networks — Base (Superbridge), Gnosis (Gnosis bridge / OmniBridge), NeuroWeb (Snowbridge), keeping NeuroWeb's chain context + add-to-wallet steps. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
…unchanged, testnet TRAC + all Hubs are new V10); don't imply mainnet Hubs are in repo yet Manual check of Hub/Token addresses confirmed: - mainnet TRAC = original V8 token (unchanged); testnet TRAC redeployed for V10 - V10 Hub addresses differ from V8 on every network incl mainnet - repo only records the V10 testnet (Base Sepolia) Hub; network/mainnet-*.json are still pre-deployment placeholders, so mainnet V10 Hubs are not asserted here Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
|
||
| ## How it works (high level) | ||
|
|
||
| 1. **Challenge** — at the start of each *proof period*, an on-chain contract randomly selects a chunk of a Knowledge Collection for each Core Node to prove. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current V10 docs reintroduce “Knowledge Collection” in the Random Sampling flow, but the glossary in this repo says Knowledge Collection is a legacy/pre-V10.1 term and V10 publishing mints Knowledge Assets instead. This creates a terminology/API mismatch for integrators trying to map the docs to current knowledge-assets APIs and UALs. Use “Knowledge Asset” here unless the random-sampling contract really exposes a collection-level concept that needs to be defined separately.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Issue: The new V10 random sampling doc says challenges select a chunk of a Knowledge Collection, but the current V10 docs/glossary define Knowledge Collection as a retired pre-V10.1 term and the public model is Knowledge Assets. Since this doc is audience: human+agent, keeping the legacy term here can send integrations looking for deprecated KC concepts/APIs. Use Knowledge Asset/chunk/leaf terminology, or explicitly call out any remaining internal legacy naming.
… launched) Per maintainer: V10 mainnet (Base/Gnosis/NeuroWeb) is not released yet — only Base Sepolia testnet is live. Add a status hint to the Networks and Contract addresses pages so nothing implies V10 is live on mainnet; mainnet TRAC addresses stay as reference/bridging only. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
| # Contract addresses | ||
|
|
||
| {% hint style="info" %} | ||
| DKG V10 is currently live on **Base Sepolia (testnet)** only. Mainnet (Base, Gnosis, NeuroWeb) has not launched yet — see the [V10 Mainnet Release Timeline](../origintrail-v9-v10/v10-mainnet-release-timeline.md). The mainnet TRAC addresses below are the existing token contracts on those chains (for reference and bridging); the V10 mainnet protocol contracts (Hub, etc.) will be published at mainnet launch. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This marks V10 mainnet as not launched and says only Base Sepolia is live, but the repo's current V10 timeline says the mainnet launch window was April 15-17, 2026 across NeuroWeb, Base, and Gnosis, and the T&C already list those as supported chains. This is not just stale wording: it changes operator behavior by directing publishers/node runners away from mainnet and telling them mainnet Hub addresses are unavailable. The same claim appears in docs/general/networks.md:13, so both pages should be reconciled with the actual launch/support state.
|
|
||
| NeuroWeb is a permissionless, EVM-enabled Polkadot parachain; its native token is **NEURO** (used for gas). It evolved from the original OriginTrail Parachain via a December 2023 community governance vote. Dedicated docs live at [docs.neuroweb.ai](https://docs.neuroweb.ai/). | ||
|
|
||
| Bridge TRAC between Ethereum and NeuroWeb via [Snowbridge](https://app.snowbridge.network/). Step-by-step instructions are in the [NeuroWeb documentation](https://docs.neuroweb.ai/ethereum-neuroweb-trac-bridge). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The NeuroWeb bridge section stops at Snowbridge/import-token, but the linked NeuroWeb bridge docs require users to map their Polkadot/NeuroWeb address to an EVM address before bridged TRAC can be used for DKG staking or publishing. Without calling out that mapping step, users can successfully bridge TRAC and still fail to use it from the DKG EVM wallet path or see the wrong balance in MetaMask.
|
|
||
| ## General | ||
|
|
||
| * [Networks & RPCs](general/networks.md) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PR adds a new docs navigation section and moves the bug bounty page, but the supplied validation evidence says no tests were run. For this type of change, the meaningful regression check is a docs render/link check over docs/SUMMARY.md and the new docs/general/* pages; without that evidence, broken navigation, moved-page links, or unsupported GitBook syntax would only be caught manually after publishing.
…ding Branimir's confirmation Per team (Jurij): prep the Base mainnet Hub using the pre-mainnet deployment address from the bounty page (0x26146f51...). Marked as the pre-mainnet release-candidate deployment; Gnosis/NeuroWeb mainnet Hubs still added at launch. Awaiting @branimir.rakic sign-off before merge. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
…epolia only Per maintainer: - Gnosis Chiado test TRAC address dug out of the V8 dkg-evm-module deployments (gnosis_chiado_test_contracts.json): 0x9cFa71394906fa38399aD305E7Ca97b00e3b4449 - reworded the testnet note so it no longer implies the faucet covers all chains — it currently serves Base Sepolia only (the active V10 testnet); Chiado/NeuroWeb testnet addresses are the existing test-token contracts for reference Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2 participants
Why
Audit of the old docs (
dkg-node/docsbranch) vs the new V10 docs found reference/resource pages that were dropped in the migration but are still relevant to V10. This re-adds the safe, still-accurate ones under a new General section, placed lower in the menu (after References).What's in this PR
New
## Generalsection (docs/general/):packages/evm-module/deployments(testnet Hub/Token addresses taken frombase_sepolia_v10_contracts.json)Moved:
⚠️ This changes its URL from
General Bug Bountyout of Active Now → General (per maintainer request)./active-now/general-bug-bountyto/general/general-bug-bounty(it only went live recently, so impact is minimal — a redirect can be added if needed).Deliberately NOT re-added
Verified against the V10 code: dkg.js / dkg.py SDKs and the RAGAS eval guide are gone in V10 (it integrates via CLI / MCP / HTTP), so those were intentionally dropped, not migrated.
Still to come (separate, at release — need the new Staking UI screenshots)
Conviction staking how-to, redelegation, and a staker FAQ.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code