Skip to content

feat(opstack): run op-rbuilder as a host process via builderBinary#3

Merged
julio4 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
jules/opstack-builder-process
Jul 23, 2026
Merged

feat(opstack): run op-rbuilder as a host process via builderBinary#3
julio4 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
jules/opstack-builder-process

Conversation

@julio4

@julio4 julio4 commented Jul 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Adds builderBinary opstack recipe option that runs op-rbuilder as a locally built host process instead of pinned container. This needs a deterministic EL p2p identity + host-published p2p port so the host process can trusted-peer-dial the sequencer EL directly.

Current default container mode is unchanged.

@julio4
julio4 force-pushed the jules/opstack-builder-process branch from 8bddb1f to da0e72d Compare July 20, 2026 15:18

@canercidam canercidam left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great! 🔥

Comment thread recipes/opstack.ts
// The bootnode is only needed for container mode's discovery-based
// peering; a host-process op-rbuilder dials the EL directly (see above).
...(builderHostProcess ? [] : [
{ name: "bootnode", containers: [{ name: "bootnode", prototype: "bootnode" }] },

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If I am reading correctly, we are turning on the bootnode here but not doing the same when we switch to the processes instead. Is this intentional?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes! In host-process mode builder can't cross container network boundary so the discovery is not possible via bootnode, so we discard it completely. Instead the sequencer EL has a deterministic p2p identity + p2p port so the builder can dials it directly.

@julio4
julio4 merged commit 9337c63 into main Jul 23, 2026
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants