Update to StarkWare delegation program - call for feedback

šŸ¤·ā€ā™€ļø All-Purpose Hangout
21

At Stakely, we operate validators across more than 30 blockchains, with over $500M currently under management. From that experience, we welcome the shift towards fewer but more serious validators, and would like to share a few observations.

Route A tends to reward those who already lead. The top-staker track selects purely by stake, and StarkWareā€™s delegation is then layered on top of the operators who already hold the most, so the gap between the largest players and everyone else is likely to widen rather than narrow. Itā€™s a pattern common across many networks: they feel they are ā€œoverpaying for securityā€ when, in reality, they are paying the leading operators more while the rest barely cover their costs. And should stake settle on only a handful of names, a single security incident at any one of them could escalate into an ecosystem-wide problem; precisely the outcome decentralisation is meant to prevent.

For that reason, the eight infrastructure-provider seats seem, if anything, too few. That track is the most direct way to broaden the base with serious, independent teams, so we would expand it, publish transparent selection criteria, and give greater weight to demonstrated Starknet participation (testnet track record, liveness) and to professional operations, such as audited practice (SOC 2 Type II and similar), 24/7 on-call, and secure key management.

In short, we support having fewer but more reliable operators, with the caveat that ā€œreliabilityā€ carries real, recurring costs: audited infrastructure, 24/7 on-call, and robust key management. For the validator set to fill with operators who truly meet that standard, the delegation has to make it feasible. Weā€™d be glad to share more detail from our own operations.

22

Probably most guys are not so activeā€¦ could not believe that i am only one that want at least 2m contributionā€¦

23

Thanks for keeping this open, Ohad.
Itā€™s not for us to judge whether 31 is the right number of validators, those sustainability numbers are better handled by the team, and no one knows them like you do. What does concern us is the level of centralization this reduction could create, and the possible disappearance of independent validators who genuinely add value to the chain, a profile we consider ourselves part of.
We hope that within those calculations, real weight is given to the actual number of independent validators adding value, not just the total participant count, since that also plays a role in the projectā€™s sustainability over the medium and long term.

24

Hey! Notice that the ecosystem contributor track isnā€™t ā€œjustā€ for $2K/month fee. The intention is that applications that generate these amount of fees, and would like to participate in staking, are automatically eligible. The remaning spots will be given to other contributions which are less direct (such as this one). I acknowledge that the number of overall sits is relatively low, but the goal here is to make a significant delegation which more than justifies the effort of being a validator to top ecosystem members within the program budget, which leads to this number of suggested recepients.

Please include all the data around your tool, how it works, which validators used is (by name, if possible, so we can validate it with them), in your application!

25

First, notice that top-8 stakers do not take a spot from the serious infra provider allocations, so we will probably end up with slightly more than 8 serious infrastructure providers.

We believe that 8-10 infrastructure providers is the right balance, allowing the team to dedicate the time of talking with all of them and get their insights on how to move forward before applying protocol upgrades. If we see that the 8-10 validators give us 8-10 different opinions and we need to attract more relevant providers for crystallizing the best path forward, we may very well increase the number in fewer iterations

For now, the very limited number of providers selected is what allowing us to ensure each provider will get 15M STRK delegation. Do you think that this number is too high given the additional requirements? (Sepolia operation, availability to consult the team, etc.?)

26

Hey everyone, thank you for the intense feedback session so far.

After digesting your feedback, the following changes are proposed:

Reducing the delegation to some of the top-8 stakers: We acknowledge that ā€œgiving more delegation to the strong stakersā€ is hurting decentralization. However, we also wouldnā€™t want to penalize top stakers who would be eligible through other tracks just because they have worked hard to attract delegations.

The solutions proposed: The delegation size that validators in the top-8 stakers get automatically will be reduced to 8M STRK, the mid category suggested in the feedback. However, if a top-8 validator demonstrates he is also a top-tier infrastructure provider or ecosystem contributor, he will receive 15-20M STRK, as per the initial suggestion.

As this change may make more STRK available for the program elsewhere, we will slightly expand track B to double down on decentralization concerns from another angle. The size of track B will increase from 5 to 7 spots.

Furthermore, to accommodate the fact that the track B delegation does not cover much beyond infra-costs, we will not expect track B recipients to dedicate an hour/month to feedback with the team (but they will still, ofc, have the option to do so if desired). Other expectations (Sepolia instance and on-call starting Staking V3) are still in place.

27

Hey everyone, thanks a lot for providing much needed feedback on the initial proposal. As there were no pushbacks to the proposal following the suggested amendment from last week, we will go with these. For your convenience, here is a self contained version of the delegation program, following the feedback:

TLDR of the proposed change

After two rounds of expanding the reach and attracting more stakers, we are shifting to prioritize quality over quantity. Fewer validators will receive more delegation (up to 33 validators, compared to 130+ before). Validators under the updated plan will typically receive a larger amount (from 5M to 20M STRK, compared to 2M to 5M before), while higher standards of reliability and availability will be expected from them. This is a deliberate shift from breadth toward depth and long-term partnership.

Why weā€™re making this change

The delegation program exists to bootstrap a healthy, decentralized validator set for Starknet. As the network has evolved, weā€™ve learned that our current approach isnā€™t serving that goal as well as it should.

Maintaining a Starknet validator is a serious operation. Teams are expected to test their validators on testnet releases rigorously, stay up to date with protocol upgrades, maintain on-call services, and be highly available to provide feedback to best optimize the Starknet and staking experience, as Starknet progresses towards decentralization.

Previous rounds of the delegation program aimed to give significant delegation when the cost/investment reference was maintaining mainnet validator running. But as validators are expected to do more, itā€™s pivotal to ensure that the received amounts also better support significant off-chain resources and human-time which we expect serious stakers to allocate.

To the validators who will no longer receive delegation under the new structure: thank you. Your early participation helped get Starknet staking off the ground. This change reflects a shift in strategy, not a reflection on your work, and we hope youā€™ll stay part of the conversation as the validator set grows in future phases.

The new structure

Who is eligible

The StarkWare delegation program will continue to have two tracks, but their goals and amounts will change.

Route A - Partner delegation

Route A will be composed of up to 26 recipients, who will each be entitled to a significant delegation of at least 8M STRK. Candidates that demonstrate that they are a top-tier infrastructure provider or an ecosystem contributor will get delegations starting from 15M STRK.

This amount will go higher if the candidate qualifies for route A under more than one track, or if the candidate has maintained significant testnet activity to date, and could reach up to 20M STRK.

All Route A participants must demonstrate 99% mainnet liveness over the last three months, and in addition must be one of the following:

  • A top staker. Be one of the top 8 stakers by STRK stake, which are not StarkWare or the Starknet Foundation. Delegations done by StarkWare or the Starknet Foundation will be ignored for the stake ranking here - the logic is to reward serious stakers which attracted a lot of staking from outside StarkWare or the Foundation (8 recipients).

  • A top-tier infrastructure provider. We want to recognize and reward serious infrastructure providers/stakers from other chains that maintain a Starknet staking service. Their involvement is a key factor in reaching out to a larger retail staking audience, and in gaining a healthy perspective on the doā€™s and donā€™ts of decentralizing the network. This track will be limited to at most eight participants (in addition to providers entitled through the ā€œtop stakerā€ track). Submissions to this track should highlight the other chains the entity operates on (and the total stake it manages there), any audit the company holds (such as SOC 2 Type II), and continued involvement in the Starknet community or efforts made to attract non-StarkWare delegation (if any).

  • An ecosystem contributor. We want to recognize the contribution of ecosystem members to Starknetā€™s success, and ensure that core builders in the ecosystem have room to contribute to Starknet decentralization. Any app builder on Starknet whose app paid at least $2,000/month in network fees on average over the last three months is automatically eligible for this track. Additional ecosystem members who have made strong contributions to Starknet or its related tech (Stwo, etc.) in the last 6 months may apply and be considered by the StarkWare team. This track will be limited to at most ten participants (in addition to providers entitled through the other tracks). Submissions to this track (if not made by an app builder) should highlight a relevant contribution to the Starknet ecosystem made over the last 6 months.

Route B ā€” symbolic delegation

Route B will be composed of up to 7 recipients, each entitled to a delegation of 5M STRK.

Rationale: The Starknet staking program has attracted a number of enthusiasts who actively participate in decentralization discussions, maintain a Sepolia footprint, and take their staking role seriously.

The criterion for this route is demonstrated 99% liveness over the last three months, on both mainnet and testnet. Applicants should ideally describe why they take interest in Starknet staking, what brought them to participate, and what perspective they can bring going forward.

Ongoing expectations from the third round participants

To retain delegation, they are expected to meet the following:

  • Mainnet uptime above 99%.

  • Sepolia (testnet) uptime of 99%. We recognize that Sepoliaā€™s status has been suboptimal, and that running testnet infrastructure is real work.

  • Starting staking V3/Decentralized validation is live (currently estimated for early 2027) - have a 24/7 on-call service in case there are production issues which require attention.

  • Track Aā€™s recipients are also expected to actively participate in the staking conversations and provide feedback when asked. Teams are expected to give one hour per month (when asked for) for consulting the StarkWare team around best practices done in other decentralized networks, and provide feedback on the Starknet roadmap.