0d658e9ce1
* Create eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md * Update and rename eip-Reward-full-nodes-validating-tx.md to eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Quotes for Micah * The amount of computation to validate a transaction will be the same as a miner... * Add comments on Micah's suggestions and give further specification details * Further commentary on transaction fee amount for full nodes vs miner tx fees * Add "One problem with this is that a miner could run a full node validator using a different address with the same computer, and just cache the result of their execution and use it for the full node validator. I'm not sure how you would prevent this, but perhaps you could using IP address tracking (similarly asserting that the IP address of a full node validator isn't the same as the miner) which would add additional complexity to the protocol, but this could also be hacked with dynamic IPs and VPNs." * he user agent would contain the information needed to send an amount of ETH to the full node and the client, which are the addresses of these parties and the amounts to add. I think full nodes would need to add to their set up to add the address to receive ETH after validating transactions. These fields could be read-only, or immutable, so that someone can't overwrite them with another address, thus preventing one possible attack. * Add a missing T * Update frontmatter * Comment out implementation, add backwards incompatibility * Update the specification, rewording and moving content * Update the header, Test Cases and Implementation * Update eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md * Chamge the category to Core * to be assigned => <to be assigned> * discussions-to: https://gitter.im/ethereum/topics/topic/5ac8574227c509a774e7901a/eip-reward-full-nodes-and-clients * Move around fields in the header * Add an extra line to see if that will get the build to pass * Assign eip number 908 * Rename eip-Reward-full-nodes-and-clients.md to eip-908.md
EIPs 
Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs) describe standards for the Ethereum platform, including core protocol specifications, client APIs, and contract standards.
A browsable version of all current and draft EIPs can be found on the official EIP site.
Contributing
- Review EIP-1.
- Fork the repository by clicking "Fork" in the top right.
- Add your EIP to your fork of the repository. There is a template EIP here.
- Submit a Pull Request to Ethereum's EIPs repository.
Your first PR should be a first draft of the final EIP. It must meet the formatting criteria enforced by the build (largely, correct metadata in the header). An editor will manually review the first PR for a new EIP and assign it a number before merging it. Make sure you include a discussions-to header with the URL to a discussion forum or open GitHub issue where people can discuss the EIP as a whole.
If your EIP requires images, the image files should be included in a subdirectory of the assets folder for that EIP as follow: assets/eip-X (for eip X). When linking to an image in the EIP, use relative links such as ../assets/eip-X/image.png.
Once your first PR is merged, we have a bot that helps out by automatically merging PRs to draft EIPs. For this to work, it has to be able to tell that you own the draft being edited. Make sure that the 'author' line of your EIP contains either your Github username or your email address inside . If you use your email address, that address must be the one publicly shown on your GitHub profile.
When you believe your EIP is mature and ready to progress past the draft phase, you should do one of two things:
- For a Standards Track EIP of type Core, ask to have your issue added to the agenda of an upcoming All Core Devs meeting, where it can be discussed for inclusion in a future hard fork. If implementers agree to include it, the EIP editors will update the state of your EIP to 'Accepted'.
- For all other EIPs, open a PR changing the state of your EIP to 'Final'. An editor will review your draft and ask if anyone objects to its being finalised. If the editor decides there is no rough consensus - for instance, because contributors point out significant issues with the EIP - they may close the PR and request that you fix the issues in the draft before trying again.
EIP status terms
- Draft - an EIP that is open for consideration
- Accepted - an EIP that is planned for immediate adoption, i.e. expected to be included in the next hard fork (for Core/Consensus layer EIPs).
- Final - an EIP that has been adopted in a previous hard fork (for Core/Consensus layer EIPs).
- Deferred - an EIP that is not being considered for immediate adoption. May be reconsidered in the future for a subsequent hard fork.