Update fip-lowerbatchBal.md

editorial changes + added links to precommit and provecommit msgs with deals

FIPS/fip-lowerbatchBal.md

@@ -1,56 +1,54 @@
 ---
 fip: "00XX"
-title: Remove Batch Fee For Precommit and Lower batchBalancer
-author: irene, ZX, AX
+title: Remove Batch Fee For Precommit and Lower BatchBalancer
+author: irene (@irenegia), ZX (@zixuanzh), AX (@AxCortesCubero)
 discussions-to: https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/discussions/1092
 status: Draft
 type: Technical
 category: Core
 created: 2024-12-19
 ---
 
-# FIP-00XX: Remove Batch Fee For Precommit and Lower batchBalancer
+# FIP-00XX: Remove Batch Fee For Precommit and Lower BatchBalancer
 
 ## Simple Summary
 This FIP proposes to:
 - Remove the batch fee from `PreCommitSectorBatch2` to incentivize batching during the precommit step;
-- Revert `batchBalancer` to the original value of 2 nanoFIL to make aggregation rational for a larger range of base fee value with respect to today's network conditions.
+- Revert `BATCH_BALANCER` to the original value of 2 nanoFIL to make aggregation rational for a larger range of base fee value with respect to today's network conditions.
 
 
 ## Abstract
-`batchBalancer` and the batch gas fee were introduced in [FIP13](https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/blob/master/FIPS/fip-0013.md) for provecommit and later updated in [FIP24](https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/blob/master/FIPS/fip-0024.md), where the fee was added to the precommit step as well. 
-This mechanism makes batching in precommit and aggregation in provecommit rational (ie, cost-effective) only when the base fee is above a given threshold (which depends on `batchBalancer`, other parameters used in the mechanism and the gas used). This FIP proposes to revert to no fee for precommit and lower the value of `batchBalancer` to 2 nanoFIL, from the current 5 nanoFIL, in order to have no BaseFee threshold for batching precommit and a lower BaseFee threshold for aggregating provecommit.
+BatchBalancer and the batch gas fee were introduced in [FIP13](https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/blob/master/FIPS/fip-0013.md) for provecommit and later updated in [FIP24](https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/blob/master/FIPS/fip-0024.md), where the fee was added to the precommit step as well. 
+This mechanism makes batching in precommit and aggregation in provecommit rational (ie, cost-effective) only when the base fee is above a given threshold (which depends on BatchBalancer, other parameters used in the mechanism and the gas used). This FIP proposes to revert to no fee for precommit and lower the value of BatchBalancer to 2 nanoFIL, from the current 5 nanoFIL, in order to have no BaseFee threshold for batching precommit and a lower BaseFee threshold for aggregating provecommit.
 
 
 ## Change Motivation
 Since August 2024, gas used for onboarding methods has been higher than in the past year (see [#1092](https://github.com/filecoin-project/FIPs/discussions/1092) for more details on data and causes).  A simple mechanism to reduce gas consumption is batching: at times of high demand for network gas, storage providers (SPs) should be incentivized to batch as much as possible for both precommit and provecommit.  
 
 ### Precommit
-Due to the batch fee, currently precommit batching is only rational when the base fee exceeds 0.09 nanoFIL. Removing this fee will eliminate this obstacle, enabling more batching and therefore gas saving. To have a rough estimate of the saving, we can compare two PreCommitSector messages without deals from the same miner: 
-- [Msg 1](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacedrbvzzcea3uwtqmas7zp5moxxpbceywukxux5fvgnbi2pj25hkjs): PreCommiSectorBatch2 for 1 sector : 16.5 M gas used
-- [Msg 2](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacebbc5pdzweouhvopgfvlc4trlips4ynszut774fxkv5omz3cicd3e): PreCommitSectorBatch2 for 4 sectors):  17.7 M/ 4 =  ~4.4 M gas used (per sector)
-
-The two messages are posted to the same miner actor with little difference in the number of sectors when the message landed. The difference in gas usage indicates batching can bring a ~70% of gas saving. 
+Due to the batch fee, currently precommit batching is only rational when the base fee exceeds 0.09 nanoFIL. Removing this fee will eliminate this obstacle, enabling more batching and therefore gas saving. To have a rough estimate of the saving, we can compare two PreCommitSector messages posted by the same miner actor with little difference in the number of sectors when the message landed.
+- [Msg 1](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacebzacw3b7ymcwukk2uimahiebpke65utbfn3srgslzj5w3hh234x6): PreCommiSectorBatch2 for 1 sector : 16.7 M gas used
+- [Msg 2](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacebdqgivdbxzj25exae55j7vjasos45lvj4bzi6fj5oaya4rqwxrf6): PreCommitSectorBatch2 for 4 sectors):  18.6 M/ 4 =  4.6 M per sector (3.6x smaller)
 
 
 
 ### Provecommit
-There are two options for ProveCommitSector3: (1) "simple" batching as in precommit (ie, one message for ≥ 2 sectors) where there is a porep proof for each sector in the batched message, and (2) aggregating proofs of multiple sectors and post in one message. 
+There are two options for `ProveCommitSector3`: (1) "simple" batching as in precommit (ie, one message for ≥ 2 sectors) where there is a porep proof for each sector in the batched message, and (2) aggregating proofs of multiple sectors and post in one message. 
 Batching for provecommit is already rational (cost-effective), as the batch fee applies only to aggregated proofs (opposed to precommit, where the batch balancer applies to batching). 
 
-On the other hand, aggregation is rational only when the base fee exceeds 0.065 nanoFIL. Lowering the value of `batchBalancer` from 5 to 2 nanoFIL will reduce the crossover point to 0.026 nanoFIL, making the aggregation rational across a broader range of base fee values.
+On the other hand, aggregation is rational only when the base fee exceeds 0.065 nanoFIL. Lowering the value of BatchBalancer from 5 to 2 nanoFIL will reduce the crossover point to 0.026 nanoFIL, making the aggregation rational across a broader range of base fee values.
 
-To have a rough estimate of the gas saving, we compared these messages (no deals)
-- [Msg 1](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzaceaddryxumxg35givyt7pe745wlsmrlrx7bj4sdb56nho4akyi5tzu): ProveCommitSectors3 for 1 sector (no deals): 78.4 M 
-- [Msg 2](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzaceah7m6jzravjoswo2pljzit36euu3sgz5jzbnpkcfp23b76texiv6): ProveCommitSectors3 for 4 sectors, batched (no aggregation): 96.4 M/4 = ~24.1 M per sector 
-- [Msg 3](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacedeh74ds4x4l5nlfahmlvwn4obfukhgqnf6rxlaargvsm56sljune): ProveCommitSectors3 for 4 sectors, aggregated[^*]: 217.4 M/4 = ~54.4 M per sector 
+To have a rough estimate of the saving, we can compare these `ProveCommitSector3` messages posted by the same miner actor with little difference in the number of sectors when the message landed.
+- [Msg 1](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacebshpv7afwnxph6l4jnbpwpqnss3cboyfvlualfrjbox76hojjnlo): ProveCommitSectors3 for 1 sector: 225.5 M 
+- [Msg 2](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacebd7ftq5lk4ikuif4j3xfwiabmla5bek3kuhn3k6x3obufxyzrs6y): ProveCommitSectors3 for 4 sectors, batched (no aggregation): 412 M/4 = 103 M per sector (2.2x smaller)
+- [Msg 3](https://www.filutils.com/en/message/bafy2bzacedezi6lm4warrfq2n6dxvpokowzt5isacbq2kojkz462yfpfq7lxm): ProveCommitSectors3 for 4 sectors, aggregated[^*]: 517.4 M/4 = 129.3 M per sector (1.7x smaller)
 
 [^*]: In practice, aggregation is currently giving less gas saving respect to batching due to a bug causing single proofs to be charged an incorrect amount of gas units. So currently, batching is to be preferred with respect to aggregation. Once this code bug is fixed, batching will cost more gas units and aggregation would be the option with the largest gas unit saving per sector. 
 
 
 ## Specification
 - Remove the burning `aggregate_fee` from `PreCommitSectorBatch2`.
-- Decrease **BatchBalancer** value to 2 nanoFIL.
+- Decrease `BATCH_BALANCER` value to 2 nanoFIL.
 
 
 ## Design Rationale
@@ -69,7 +67,7 @@ This FIP modifies actor behavior and will require a new Filecoin network version
 
 
 ## Test Cases
-- Certain test cases (similar to as FIP24)  may need to be adjusted when changing the batchBalancer value.
+- Certain test cases (similar to as FIP24)  may need to be adjusted when changing the BatchBalancer value.
 
 
 
@@ -81,16 +79,16 @@ This FIP does not affect underlying proofs or protocol security.
 ## Incentive Considerations
 This proposal is expected to enhance the incentives for batching and aggregation, thereby reducing gas costs and improving the network's overall efficiency.
 
-The current batchBalancer of 5 nanoFIL was set in FIP24 more than three years ago and a lot has changed since then. With the current network parameters, the crossover network BaseFee when aggregating becomes rational for ProveCommit is around 0.065 nanoFIL. At equilibrium 0.065 nanoFIL, it is estimated that to onboard a 32GiB sector full of deals, it will cost around 3-5% of initial pledge in gas burn to onboard.
+The current BatchBalancer of 5 nanoFIL was set in FIP24 more than three years ago and a lot has changed since then. With the current network parameters, the crossover network BaseFee when aggregating becomes rational for ProveCommit is around 0.065 nanoFIL. At equilibrium 0.065 nanoFIL, it is estimated that to onboard a 32GiB sector full of deals, it will cost around 3-5% of initial pledge in gas burn to onboard.
 
-By lowering the BatchBalancer value, the network is incentivizing more aggregation at a lower equilibrium BaseFee value, thus freeing up more chain bandwidth. By reverting to the original batchBalancer of 2 nanoFIL, the equilibrium network crossover BaseFee for ProveCommit (when aggregating for ProveCommit becomes rational) is at around 0.025 nanoFIL, incentivizing ProveCommit aggregation at a broader range of BaseFee values. In the medium term, however, BatchBalancer is intended to be replaced with an explicit proof fee at the time of onboarding. 
+By lowering the BatchBalancer value, the network is incentivizing more aggregation at a lower equilibrium BaseFee value, thus freeing up more chain bandwidth. By reverting to the original BatchBalancer of 2 nanoFIL, the equilibrium network crossover BaseFee for ProveCommit (when aggregating for ProveCommit becomes rational) is at around 0.025 nanoFIL, incentivizing ProveCommit aggregation at a broader range of BaseFee values. In the medium term, however, BatchBalancer is intended to be replaced with an explicit proof fee at the time of onboarding. 
 
 
 ## Product Considerations
 From a product perspective, this FIP is expected to:
-- Lower onboarding costs for SPs by removing barriers to precommit batching (e.g., precommit batch proof fees);
+- Lower onboarding costs for SPs by removing barriers to precommit batching (e.g., precommit batch fee);
 - Encouraging batching and aggregation reduces block space consumption, reducing the risk of higher base fee values;
-- Simplify analysis and cost calculations for SPs by removing of precommit aggregated proof fees.
+- Simplify analysis and cost calculations for SPs by removing of precommit batch fee.