Byzantium release

[arkpar]

• EIP-208 (86): Account abstraction | EIP-86 #4697
• EIP-98: Receipt state root removal | EIP-98: Optional transaction state root #4296
• EIP-210 (96): Blockhash and state root changes | EIP-210 BLOCKHASH changes #5505
• EIP-100: Change difficulty adjustment to target mean block time including uncles | eip100b #5027
• EIP-198 (101): Precompile for bigint modular exponentiation | EIP198 and built-in activation #4926
• EIP-206 (140): REVERT opcode | EIP-140 REVERT opcode #5477
• EIP-214 (116): STATIC_CALL opcode | EIP-116 (214), #4833 #4851
• EIP-211 (5/8) RETURNDATACOPY and RETURNDATASIZE | EIP-211 RETURNDATACOPY and RETURNDATASIZE #5678
• EIP-212 Precompiled contract for pairing check | EIP-212 (bn128 curve pairing) #5307
• EIP-213 Precompiled contracts for addition and scalar multiplication on the elliptic curve alt_bn128 | EIP-213 (bn128 curve operations) #4999
• EIP-649 Difficulty bomb delay and issuance reduction | Byzantium updates #5855
• EIP-658 Embedding transaction return data in receipts | Byzantium updates #5855

---

For reference - Byzantium Meta: EIP-609

[debris]

I will take EIP-116: STATIC_CALL opcode

[rphmeier]

I'll take EIP-198 (101): Precompile for bigint modular exponentiation
Implementation here: #4926

[NikVolf]

Will take

EIP-212 Precompiled contract for pairing check
EIP-213 Precompiled contracts for addition and scalar multiplication on the elliptic curve alt_bn128

[debris]

I will take

EIP-100: Change difficulty adjustment to target mean block time including uncles
EIP-206 (140): REVERT opcode

[rphmeier]

@NikVolf The gas costs for those haven't been sorted yet, unfortunately.

[NikVolf]

@rphmeier yep but we need to sort the math meanwhile anyway

[rphmeier]

I can take EIP-210 (96): Blockhash and state root changes also

[tomusdrw]

Just realized we also need to update transaction queue propagation/miners strategy for EIP-208 (EIP-86)

[rphmeier]

@tomusdrw yeah, it should be done with a whitelist of accepted abstraction contracts. Running to check if it pays the miner is a DoS vulnerability.

I think we can do it similarly to the service-transaction checker: either pass a list of addresses from the command line or fetch them from a Parity-maintained contract.