[APPROVED] Cosmos Hub & Neutron: Validator alignment

Hi, yes @Spaydh provided an update in another forum thread:


Hi everyone,

As seen in the response above, there have been a number of technical issues with multiple multisig implementations which have delayed the process.

Nevertheless, I’m happy to share that the allocations are being made right now. Due to the extreme message length required for making 180 different vesting allocations, the execution will have to be broken down in 6 proposals, which all register the same parameters. Each allocation is for 10k NTRN, starting on March 26 this year and ending on March 26 next year.

The first of the 6 proposal is now being reviewed by the committee:

The other 5 proposals should be up shortly.


Oh cosmos hub forum, please never change

Hi @Spaydh the 6 proposals have been approved and the start time of the vesting was indicated as 28th April 2024 but it seems the vesting hasn’t started yet, could you please clarify?

Proposals don’t execute immediately once they are passed. Once the proposals are executed, the vesting will begin as of the start date indicated in the proposal.

All of the DAO members are doing our independent due diligence in checking 180 addresses before voting or executing so it’s a long process.

  1. Which of the Validators who did not opt-out are eligible for it?
  2. Which address can claim the drop?

Thank you for the update, please update us when the vesting starts.

The proposal says “Executed”

start_point.time for all validators should be Sun Apr 28 2024 22:00:00 GMT+0000

end_point.time for all validators should be Mon Apr 28 2025 22:00:00 GMT+0000


Hi all,

The initial allocations have been made. You can browse the executed proposals on DAODAO and view the vesting contracts here. Here are brief guides to help you navigate the vesting:

To check the allocation

Simply replace the address in this query with your validator’s

To claim vested tokens

If your assigned key is an EOA (not great :cold_face:) or a Ledger: log in to Celatone and click “Execute” on the claim method.

Otherwise, you may have to execute the transaction directly:

  • The contract address is: neutron1lzw9jmag8kj7py46z83zuvlwx944a3we3h9nwe804lp0qex3qa9qvp82l4
  • Since arguments are optional, the message is simply:
    "claim": {}

If you are unable to sign anything using your assigned key due to security practices, the committee can clawback the current allocation and re-allocate it to another address controlled by your organization. If that’s your case, please mention it as a reply and we’ll work with the committee to set up a process to securely re-assign the allocation.

I also wanted to share operational changes we’re making to make the process smoother/more reliable.

Initially, we had thought that vesting the tokens would be simplest way forward. But changes in the set (validators opting in/out, joining/leaving the active set) happen much more frequently that we would be able to update the vesting contracts, which would lead to unfair outcomes. It also requires node operators to go and manually claim their allocations, which is not the smoothest experience.

To address this issue, we are planning to transition to a monthly payment model:

We are developing an automated solution that will index all blocks, retrieve validator signatures, calculate uptime, and automatically generate a transfer proposal for 1/12th of the yearly amount to all active validators each month.

Operationally, this will allow the committee, composed of very busy people from a number of different teams on different continents, to sign transactions more reliably, as it’ll be able to simply block time to review/process this transaction every month.

It will also make the process more transparent for validators, as there will be a simple transparent calculation that payments can be checked against. Our proposal is to trigger the payout for all validators that signed at least 95% of blocks in the past month.

We believe that this is a reasonable threshold because, in practice, this level of performance is widely attained throughout the Interchain: for example, 156 Cosmos Hub validator maintain ≥ 99% uptime on Cosmos Hub, and based on Smartstake’s dashboard and Observatory.zone, only 2 validators would be at risk of failing a 95% threshold.

We believe it strike the right balance between setting realistic expectations for validator SLAs, while also helping improve the liveness and security of the consumer chain: today, according to Smartstake, 14 validators with uptime ranging from 50% to 95%, and 18 opted-out validators (uptime 0%-5%). Implementing the threshold should create an incentive for these validators to bring their performance closer to the Interchain’s standard.

Since the budget was set based on the assumption that every single validator would actively validate the network, there may be excess NTRN left at the end of the yearly period. In the future, it might make sense to consider recycling these tokens as an additional incentive for outstanding performance, for example to validators who not only maintain high uptime (~99%) but also run sidecars such as Slinky, which directly contribute to the value/success of the Hub and its consumer chain.


Thanks for the update. :metal:

1 Like

We are happy about the progress. Many months ago we, Cosmic Validator, had an idea of potentially using some of the unclaimed NTRN from the airdrop and sent to the Cosmos Hub community pool as revenue for validators running the Neutron consumer chain with negligable revenues. When we initially did a poll on twitter to ask the Cosmos community about our idea some were surprised about the idea or even against, but the overall majority of the community was supportive. So we are happy that we could contribute to the sustainability of the economics of consumer chains in the Cosmos Hub and hopefully the idea now from EffortCapital about the VP tax will also be implemented soon to further strengthen the economics of consumer chains and validators