Round 8 - GMC Community Discussion of Submitted Applications

[Valdorff]

@JeffreyGoldberb please delete your comment in the bounty thread – we try to keep clean award threads and bring discussion over here.

The original post:

@JeffreyGoldberb

Hey Jeff from the community here, I think this is more complex than what is outlined here.

Trying to understand from a user perspective:

1. How will this impact rETH? This means rETH APY will also increase? Can rETH users opt out of restaking exposure?
2. Wouldn’t rETH be more risky than other LSTs for that matter?
3. What are the risks of pointing rocketpool eth withdrawal addresses to 3rd parties?
4. Assuming AVS rewards are in volatile ERC20s, how do we plan to pass that to users if at all?

1 - As written, RP would have senior debt (aka, Eigenlayer gets second crack at bonds – aka, rETH isn’t exposed at all). There would be no direct APY increase. There is potential for a rETH APY increase downstream, eg, NOs might accept less commission because of this revenue stream.
2 - No - see 1.
3 - The Node Operator risks losing up to 100% of their funds. In order to get their rewards or their principal, each step in the chain has to pass funds on. If this extra step fails to do that (by design due to an Eigenlayer slash, by rug, or by bug), then the NO could lose funds. There is some room for annoyance here where an NO might have no incentive to operate well for RP if already Eigenslashed. There’s potential mitigation available at the research level (eg, @ArtDemocrat’s proposal to pay back outlier underperformance to rETH and @epineph’s proposal to garnish rewards).
4 - There’s a lot of question marks. The simplest guess would be “NOs receive stuff and don’t directly pass anything on” – but indirect benefits may apply as described in 1.