Revert "MevShield / Transaction Extension" #2267
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
hi, there is still different kinds of MeV going on, additionally opt-in encrypted mempool is a very powerful feature that can be used for more than just MeV prevention |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Reverts #2266
According to my tests with relay service which was shielding transactions previously (just providing UX for scheduling) - during the week of Dec 1st, there was some change within consensus and as of my latest tests on Dec 5th - I've confirmed that relay has stopped working because something has changed. Also I've confirmed that there is no frontrunning anymore due to this change. Confirmed directly on mainnet through series of tests.