feat: add support for eth/70 eip-7975 #20255

0xKarl98 · 2025-12-10T10:15:03Z

This targets on issue #19805 , since eip-7542 has been withdrawn , this PR is implementing eip-7975 .

Scope of this PR:

focus on server‑side eth/70 support and basic compatibility only; full client‑side eth/70 pagination and the EIP‑7975 safety checks for partial receipt downloads (using lastBlockIncomplete and transaction/gas‑limit constraints) are explicitly left for follow‑up PRs.

mattsse · 2025-12-10T12:40:20Z

crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/receipts.rs

+    /// The request id used to correlate the response.
+    pub request_id: u64,


I think we don't need this here because the request id is tracked in

reth/crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/message.rs

Line 581 in 2e62387

pub struct RequestPair<T> {

mattsse · 2025-12-10T12:40:48Z

crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/block_range.rs

I think we can exclude all of this for this pr?

mattsse · 2025-12-10T12:41:59Z

crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/message.rs

-            EthMessageID::GetReceipts => EthMessage::GetReceipts(RequestPair::decode(buf)?),
+            EthMessageID::GetReceipts => {
+                if version >= EthVersion::Eth70 {
+                    EthMessage::GetReceipts70(GetReceipts70::decode(buf)?)


this should also use RequestPair

mattsse · 2025-12-10T12:44:58Z

crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/receipts.rs

+    /// Index into the receipts of the first requested block hash.
+    pub first_block_receipt_index: u64,
+    /// The block hashes to request receipts for.
+    pub block_hashes: Vec<B256>,


then we need to adjust rlp encoding of this type so that this becomes:

firstBlockReceiptIndex: P, [blockhash₁: B_32, blockhash₂: B_32, ...]

and not

[firstBlockReceiptIndex: P, [blockhash₁: B_32, blockhash₂: B_32, ...]]]

like it would with the macro

mattsse · 2025-12-10T12:45:26Z

crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/status.rs

these changes we can also undo

mattsse

cool,

we can simplify a lot of things here, basically the session shouldnt have to deal with any response manipulation

this has some additional changes for the withdrawn eip that we can fully exclude from this pr

mattsse · 2025-12-11T05:05:15Z

crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/status.rs


-/// `StatusMessage` can store either the Legacy version (with TD) or the
-/// eth/69 version (omits TD).
+/// Status message for `eth/70` including the block range as per EIP-7975.


we dont need this anymore, right? so we can undo all status changes I believe

Yeah forgot to change the comment here

mattsse · 2025-12-11T05:07:36Z

crates/net/eth-wire-types/src/message.rs

+    ///
+    /// Note: The eth/70 encoding for `Receipts` in EIP-7975 inlines the
+    /// request id instead of using a generic [`RequestPair`].
+    Receipts70(Receipts70<N::Receipt>),


this should also use RequestPair and we can implement encode manually for Receipts70

I think we have used RequestPair here , but the comment isn't clear , i.e. :
pub type Receipts70<T = Receipt> = crate::message::RequestPair<Receipts70Payload>;

Will make others misunderstood that we don't use RequestPair here but i wil simplify it

mattsse · 2025-12-11T05:07:55Z

crates/net/network/src/session/active.rs

+    /// The last time we updated the remote block range information.
+    pub(crate) last_range_update: Option<Instant>,


this isnt needed for this pr

Have removed them

mattsse · 2025-12-11T05:08:23Z

crates/net/network/src/session/active.rs

                    request_id,
                    rx: PeerResponse::$resp_item { response },
                    received: Instant::now(),
+                    metadata: ReceivedRequestMetadata::None,


we can assume that we handle the request properly internally so we dont need to track this here

mattsse · 2025-12-11T05:09:55Z

crates/net/network/src/session/active.rs

+    fn handle_outgoing_response(
+        &mut self,
+        id: u64,
+        metadata: ReceivedRequestMetadata,
+        resp: PeerResponseResult<N>,
+    ) {
+        let msg_result = match metadata {
+            ReceivedRequestMetadata::Eth70Receipts { first_block_receipt_index } => {
+                // For eth/70 GetReceipts requests we construct a `Receipts70`
+                // message that respects `firstBlockReceiptIndex` but still
+                // reuses the existing receipts lookup path.
+                self.build_eth70_receipts_response(id, first_block_receipt_index, resp)
+            }
+            ReceivedRequestMetadata::None => resp.try_into_message(id),
+        };
+
+        match msg_result {


this we dont need to change, we can instead introduce another variant for this so we can handle the v70 request internally properly

makes sense

mattsse · 2025-12-11T05:10:17Z

crates/net/network/src/session/active.rs

+    fn build_eth70_receipts_response(
+        &self,
+        id: u64,
+        first_block_receipt_index: u64,
+        resp: PeerResponseResult<N>,
+    ) -> RequestResult<EthMessage<N>> {


this we can undo, this should be handled where we process the request

Suspect so , but thanks for the confirm

0xKarl98 added 18 commits December 5, 2025 15:53

Add eth/70 protocol support and block range messaging

7856d25

add comments

70480ac

fix tests

3b129f5

touchups

13e9c00

add more comments to undertsand precisely

14453cc

cargo fmt

dd7a10b

keep eth/69 once enable full support

90492aa

instantiate based on message variant

63ac93a

optimize instant related code and remove test for now

0d38ba9

cargo fmt

04824d3

Throttle range requests using interval ticks

f49b954

simplify maybe_request_block_range and add comments

c68bd50

chore: rerun CI

19bdc02

add eth/70 GetReceipts/Receipts message types and session wiring

39c725e

fix cargo doc

3e4e764

remove unused import

b5ccdb8

Add server-side support for eth/70 receipts pagination

3b67d78

Reuse Receipts69 bloom helper for Receipts70

6d364b1

0xKarl98 requested review from Rjected, gakonst and mattsse as code owners December 10, 2025 10:15

github-project-automation bot added this to Reth Tracker Dec 10, 2025

github-project-automation bot moved this to Backlog in Reth Tracker Dec 10, 2025

mattsse requested changes Dec 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

github-project-automation bot moved this from Backlog to In Progress in Reth Tracker Dec 10, 2025

remove block-range

2c70f51

0xKarl98 marked this pull request as draft December 10, 2025 14:43

0xKarl98 added 3 commits December 11, 2025 10:58

address mattse suggestions

b7b3f32

remove eth/70 block_range

d44a500

fix cargo doc

3f2f5ba

fix test error

c6628ae

0xKarl98 marked this pull request as ready for review December 11, 2025 03:56

mattsse requested changes Dec 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

mattsse added the A-networking Related to networking in general label Dec 11, 2025

0xKarl98 added 2 commits December 11, 2025 15:22

remove unnessary last_range_update

f257508

add manual encode for Receipts70

0b4d697

0xKarl98 marked this pull request as draft December 11, 2025 09:03

0xKarl98 added 13 commits December 11, 2025 19:50

apply mattese suggestions

d242059

remove blockRangeUpdate from eth/70

26db968

share eth/69 status with eth/70

04d22f6

clean up

ed093cd

fix clippy

35d214f

cargo fmt

b6d0e04

remove unnessary macro

72bfdfe

remove unnessary macro

fc8931c

restore max

5db0e51

restore unnessary comment change

fd3b778

remove unnessary import

6a4e5eb

cargo fmt

912ce28

restore unnessary session changes

3ab7774

		/// The request id used to correlate the response.
		pub request_id: u64,

		/// The last time we updated the remote block range information.
		pub(crate) last_range_update: Option<Instant>,

feat: add support for eth/70 eip-7975 #20255

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat: add support for eth/70 eip-7975 #20255

Conversation

0xKarl98 commented Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mattsse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

0xKarl98 Dec 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

0xKarl98 Dec 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading