Could this not be seen as a kind of extension of Themis (leaving aside the ordering side of things)?
1 Like
Yeah, many parts are the same. Both system provide the orderflow to builders. But Themis is trying to also archive fairness of orderings by enforcing rules on the ordering of the system, while DOFD is more focused on incorporating the privacy of transactions.
I strongly believe that privacy is more important than tx ordering: Enforcing certain orderings of transactions makes the system unstable as in the MEV-boost auction validators would prefer blocks that don’t have the special ordering, but harvest the MEV best. That means if the MEV is big enough to outbid the protected order flow of the themis-system, then the system becomes unstable. Also in future AMM versions, McAMMs need the freedom to insert certain orders later to harvest the LVR for the liquidity providers. All that speaks against enforcing an ordering of the transaction unless I am overseeing something.
Privacy, on the other hand, is under certain circumstances even more effective as front-running protection than enforcing orders, as transaction can also have an impact on the market outside of the blockchain
4 Likes
I completely agree (which is why I said we should leave aside the ordering side of Themis). I moreso mean that it could be used as a consensus protocol to come to agreement on what the input for the next block ought to be and one could layer privacy on top.
4 Likes
Blockquote Only if a certain number of nodes decided to collude (number must be above the threshold for the threshold signature ) and not slash each other, then they would be able to extract MEV.
Seems like it is imperative to have DOFD node set to be as decentralized as possible so as to make it very difficult to collude.
2 Likes