SNO Payout Update starting 2/12/21

Storage Node Operators
#1

We appreciate all the feedback we’ve received and the patience. We read and appreciate the suggestions and do our best to consider the community point of view in our plans. We want to be sure to communicate as close to real time right now as possible so you know that we are treating the impact the current state of high ETH fees on payouts with the high priority it requires.

The main questions we’re getting are related to the timing of when we will have an L2 solution in place, what that solution will entail, and the actual impact on the SNO community of that solution.

The most important part of rolling out the L2 payout solution is that it’s fully baked. The whole experience has to be good, easy to understand, and simple to execute. And it has to be a significant improvement over the current state.

The most significant area of progress we have is with the L2 payout solution. We’ve continued to work with Matter Labs zkSync solution and we’ve been able to confirm some additional details concerning the actual user experience:

  • zkSync will support both payment of payout transaction fees and exit transaction fees in STORJ as opposed to just ETH. Payment of STORJ is not enabled on the zkSync production network at this time, but we expect that to be available when we begin payouts via zkSync. This is an external dependency on Matter Labs to enable this feature. *
  • zkSync supports self-service wallet registration and supports withdrawals from wallets where users control the private keys.
  • Users should avoid using exchange addresses or wallets where the user does not control the private keys. It is possible to withdraw from this type of account, but it will be a more expensive emergency withdrawal. Emergency withdrawals require submission of a web form today, but an automated solution is in development. Again, this is an option that is only for emergencies. *
  • We will pay 100% of any payout amount owed to SNOs who opt into the zkSync solutions. For the foreseeable future, we’ll continue to have the minimum payout threshold in place for SNOs who do not use zkSync.
  • We will provide an incentive to balance the cost impact of the rollout to SNOs
  • We will have documentation, including an FAQ prior to launch

In addition, we’re still doing research on whether some of the other possibilities are feasible, including:

  • More frequent payouts to wallets that opt in to ZkSync
  • Creating an optimal user experience for the opt-in, wallet registration and withdrawal processes based on the zkSync API

Separately, we hear that you want more feedback and more frequent communication, and we’re making an effort to increase the amount of information we’re sharing on this topic and also on some significant upcoming developments with our product and marketing initiatives.

(*) Updated 2/16/21 to reflect the current state of the availability of payment of transaction fees in STORJ on the zkSync production service and clarify that the use of the withdrawal process with wallets for which a user does not control the private keys is for emergencies and not as a feature for use with exchange addresses/

21 Likes
#2
#3

Great to see more frequent updates on these issues. Can we ask that when a solution is found and the ability for SNO’s to signal their support (I understand this is achieved through an environment variable at the moment) that a post is made that clearly and concisely explains how SNO’s can apply this change to their nodes.

It seems users have to dig quite deeply in these forums for scraps of information, more help from the moderation team to curate knowledge and apply it to the wiki/existing documentation would be very useful or at the very least sticky pertinent topics (such as this) so users can find them quicker.

4 Likes
#4

I think that’s a very fair request @Monthrect . I’m happy to work on curating that content, since I agree that it’s a lot of reading otherwise.

4 Likes
#5

What about running the payout script more frequently for people who don’t opt-in into zksync? (Not for more frequent current payout but for a chance to receive the payout from last month when the tx fees are lower. This solution should be rather low maintenance):

3 Likes
#6

Please, do not use exchange deposit address as your wallet for zkSync for sure, the emergency withdrawal could cost you up to 4x times greater fee than from your own address and it’s completely manual process.
So if you want to receive payout via L2, make sure to use your own wallet address for that, not deposit.
However, you can withdraw from your own wallet to the exchange deposit for the same fee as to your wallet address. So it could save fee to do only one TX instead of two (L2 your wallet -> L1 your wallet -> L1 deposit of exchange vs L2 your wallet -> L1 deposit of exchange).

2 Likes
#7

This is very good news! This means zkSync isn’t just a solution to the transaction fees problem, but also helps out new SNOs who don’t have any ETH for transactions.

Thanks for the update!

Do you know when you can share more about the incentive?

1 Like
#8

Thank you for the feedback. For me the most important aspect in potential opt-in to zkSync would be optimal and simple transition from current payout method (i am using MEW wallet) to zkSync with as minimum setup as possible.
On the side note, I dont mind minimum payout threshold with existing payment method too, as it stands now, but who knows what gas prices we will see in future.

#9

It’s simple: install Metamask (or use a Brave browser) and import your MEW with the same secret phrase. Then connect to https://wallet.zksync.io/ and you are ready to withdrawal or see your balance on L2.

2 Likes
#10

I did all the steps. What do I further have to do to receive my STORJ into this L2 thing? :slight_smile:

#11

Currently it is not possible to pay the transaction fees in STORJ. We are working on resolving that issue. In the meantime better calculate with the worst case fee (deposit ETH first). I have calculated the best and worst cost fee here: Test zkSync with TestSTORJ token

It is correct that you can call an emergency withdrawal if you don’t control the private keys. An emergency withdrawal comes with a significantly higher fee. Better make sure you own the private keys so that you can call a cheaper regular withdraw. There is an easy way to check that. Everyone can try to access their payout address in zkSync testnet. I am happy to send everyone testSTORJ tokens for practice.

3 Likes
#12

@jocelyn honestly i don’t see why we have to get paid all the time and not just went we request a payout… seems silly to waste a lot of resources to move storj to a wallet if many or even just some of us let it sit for extended periods…

haven’t really gotten around to read up on the L2 solution, it sounds kinda interesting, if nothing else i want to understand it, so that i can understand how it will affect the rest of this economy, so i can take actions accordingly.

you guys could always migrate to the Cardano lol apparently thats going to be a thing in the near future.
supposely one can wrap eth tokens and move the value into the Cardano block chain…

duno to much about it, just sounded kinda interesting and wanted to mention it… supposedly they will have an option for no transaction fees it will just be lowest priority transactions on the network.
might not be a solution to the transaction fees right now… but it may very well be a future option worthy of consideration.

1 Like
#13

You can do it now - opt-in for zkSync and you will be able to claim your payout when you want. However, we still need to process those payouts to your address on L2 before that :slight_smile: .

#14

Enable the zksync in the config file of the node:

#15

why would i want that… i have yet to even move any storj… you guys are the one constantly shuffling tokens around like they are poker chips…

please do tell me why i want to pay larger fees to go back from an obscure new L2 blockchain, seems like i would just be paying for you guys to solve your problem of your own creation due to constant payouts.

this is not a solution, this is a bad patch at best, so that people can look at their wallets and feel they earned something from running a node for a short while…

but it does sure seem to be Storj’s 42 atm
we always talk of less points of failure, adding more blockchains to the blockchain solution also seems like moving in the wrong direction…

if it was that good a solution why don’t you just move us all over on it… :smiley:
feels like when one is agreeing to facebooks privacy policy or something…

we care about your data…

yeah but in a way i like facebook to care about my data lol…

3 Likes
#16

zkSync is not a new blockchain.

2 Likes
#17

I am sending the storj to my exchange. To avoid commissions from my portfolio to my exchange.

It says not to send L2 to the exchange.

Can you check how much the commissions cost when going from L2 to L1 and from L1 to the exchange?

I would not like to pay a large amount of commissions to withdraw a small part of the storj.

1 Like
#18

You don’t need 2 transactions for that. You can withdraw from L2 to the exchange directly in one transaction. More details about the fees you can find here: Test zkSync with TestSTORJ token

#19

I am not shure my /Driveshare/StorjNode/config.yaml is used on Linux Debian in Docker mode. In this file are not this values i use in my docker run command. So do i have to insert this “operator.wallet-features: [“zksync”]” in this config.yaml or into my run-command? Exmpl. plz.?

2 Likes
#20

You should add this string to your config.yaml, as a last line after all other for example.
The config file is used by the storagenode, just command line parameters have a precedence above values in the config file.