From 249da4ff7c1ed575b4c9afcdbd936f0d796bdcdd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Aere Network Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2026 18:18:15 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] Terminology: the anchor certificate is a quorum since 14,961,456, and this document said both Line 23 stated the enforced minimum is six of nine, a full 2f+1 quorum. Line 192 stated the certificate is signed by f+1 validators, not by a quorum, and that we do not call it one - inviting the reader to count. The terminology paragraph was written when the threshold was three, where it was true, and was not revised when the threshold was raised on 21 August 2026. A document that asks to be counted and does not survive the count loses more than the paragraph. Corrected without deleting the distinction, and with the two things that were missing and without which the claim is not defensible: the word quorum applies only at anchor heights, about every 32nd block, and the blocks between them carry no Falcon seals at all; and the higher threshold costs liveness margin, since at six of nine three late validators stall an anchor block where three of nine tolerated six. Not pushed. Publishing is the founder's decision. --- anchor/README.md | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/anchor/README.md b/anchor/README.md index 385a30c..f8323e6 100644 --- a/anchor/README.md +++ b/anchor/README.md @@ -189,10 +189,22 @@ sentence. Someone else has to do the verifying, which is why it is here. ## Terminology, used precisely -**A certificate here is signed by f+1 validators, not by a quorum.** With f Byzantine faults -tolerated, f+1 signatures guarantee that at least one honest validator signed. That is a real -property and it is not the same as a quorum, and we do not call it one. Anyone counting will notice, -and they should. +**A certificate at an anchor height is signed by a quorum of six of nine validators, since block +14,961,456 (August 21, 2026). It was f+1 before that, and this paragraph said so.** The distinction +is worth keeping in view rather than deleting, because it is the difference between two genuinely +different claims. f+1 signatures guarantee only that at least one honest validator signed. A quorum +of 2f+1 is the same count QBFT itself requires to agree on the block, so from 14,961,456 the +post-quantum certificate at an anchor height is backed by as many validators as the block itself. + +Two things follow, and both should be said rather than left to be discovered. The word "quorum" +applies **only at anchor heights** - about every 32nd block; the blocks between them carry no Falcon +seals at all and are finalized by ECDSA alone, so "a post-quantum quorum on every block" would be +false. And the higher threshold costs liveness margin: at K=6 of nine, three late validators are +enough to stall an anchor block, where K=3 tolerated six. That trade was made deliberately, and it +is the reason the threshold is a configured schedule rather than a constant. + +Anyone counting will notice which of the two regimes a given height falls in, and they should. The +schedule is in the header of this document and on every node. The seal threshold is a **floor, not a cap**: nodes attach as many verified seals as arrive in time, which is at least the threshold and often more. A separate cap bounds how many are written, because