@aztec/p2p 0.0.1-commit.fce3e4f → 0.0.1-commit.ff7989d6c

package/src/services/gossipsub/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,641 @@
+# Gossipsub Peer Scoring
+
+This module configures gossipsub peer scoring parameters for the Aztec P2P network. Peer scoring helps maintain network health by rewarding well-behaving peers and penalizing misbehaving ones.
+
+## Overview
+
+Gossipsub v1.1 introduces peer scoring to defend against various attacks and improve message propagation. Each peer accumulates a score based on their behavior, and peers with low scores may be pruned from the mesh or even disconnected.
+
+For the full specification, see: https://github.com/libp2p/specs/blob/master/pubsub/gossipsub/gossipsub-v1.1.md#peer-scoring
+
+## Scoring Parameters
+
+The peer score is computed as a weighted sum of topic-specific and application-specific scores:
+
+```
+Score = TopicScore + AppSpecificScore + IPColocationPenalty + BehaviorPenalty
+```
+
+### Topic-Specific Parameters (P1-P4)
+
+Each topic has its own scoring parameters:
+
+| Parameter | Type | Description |
+|-----------|------|-------------|
+| **P1: timeInMesh** | Positive | Rewards peers for time spent in the mesh |
+| **P2: firstMessageDeliveries** | Positive | Rewards peers who deliver messages first |
+| **P3: meshMessageDeliveries** | Negative | Penalizes peers who under-deliver messages |
+| **P3b: meshFailurePenalty** | Negative | Sticky penalty applied when pruned from mesh |
+| **P4: invalidMessageDeliveries** | Negative | Penalizes peers who deliver invalid messages |
+
+### Our Configuration
+
+We configure all parameters (P1-P4) with values calculated dynamically from network configuration:
+
+| Parameter | Max Score | Configuration |
+|-----------|-----------|---------------|
+| P1: timeInMesh | +8 per topic | Slot-based, caps at 1 hour |
+| P2: firstMessageDeliveries | +25 per topic | Convergence-based, fast decay |
+| P3: meshMessageDeliveries | -34 per topic | Must exceed P1+P2 for pruning |
+| P3b: meshFailurePenalty | -34 per topic | Sticky penalty after pruning |
+| P4: invalidMessageDeliveries | -20 per message | Attack detection |
+
+**Important:** P1 and P2 are only enabled on topics with P3 enabled. By default, P3 is enabled for checkpoint_proposal and checkpoint_attestation (2 topics). Block proposal scoring is controlled by `expectedBlockProposalsPerSlot` (current default: `0`, including when env var is unset, so disabled) - see [Block Proposals](#block-proposals-block_proposal) for details. The tx topic has all scoring disabled except P4, to prevent free positive score accumulation that would offset penalties from other topics.
+
+## Exponential Decay
+
+All counters in gossipsub use exponential decay. Each heartbeat (default: 700ms), counters are multiplied by a decay factor:
+
+```
+counter = counter * decay
+```
+
+### Multi-Slot Decay Windows
+
+For low-frequency topics (like 1 message per 72-second slot), naive decay would cause counters to drop to near-zero before the next message arrives. Instead, we use **multi-slot decay windows**:
+
+| Frequency | Decay Window |
+|-----------|--------------|
+| <= 1 msg/slot | 5 slots |
+| 2-10 msg/slot | 3 slots |
+| > 10 msg/slot | 2 slots |
+
+### Decay Factor Calculation
+
+To decay to 1% of the original value over the decay window:
+
+```typescript
+heartbeatsPerSlot = slotDurationMs / heartbeatIntervalMs
+heartbeatsInWindow = heartbeatsPerSlot * decayWindowSlots
+decay = 0.01 ^ (1 / heartbeatsInWindow)
+```
+
+**Example** (72s slot, 700ms heartbeat, 5-slot decay window):
+```
+heartbeatsPerSlot = 72000 / 700 ≈ 103
+heartbeatsInWindow = 103 * 5 = 515
+decay = 0.01^(1/515) ≈ 0.991
+```
+
+## Convergence and Thresholds
+
+### Convergence (Steady-State Value)
+
+If messages arrive at a constant rate, the decaying counter converges to:
+
+```typescript
+messagesPerHeartbeat = expectedPerSlot * (heartbeatMs / slotDurationMs)
+convergence = messagesPerHeartbeat / (1 - decay)
+```
+
+### Threshold Calculation
+
+The P3 threshold determines when penalties apply. We use a conservative threshold at 30% of convergence to avoid penalizing honest peers experiencing normal variance:
+
+```typescript
+threshold = convergence * 0.3
+```
+
+## meshMessageDeliveriesWindow
+
+This parameter determines how long after validating a message other peers can still receive credit for delivering it.
+
+**How it works:**
+1. Peer A delivers a message first
+2. We validate the message
+3. Timer starts for `meshMessageDeliveriesWindow` duration (5 seconds)
+4. Any mesh peer delivering within this window gets credit
+
+**Why 5 seconds?**
+
+The [gossipsub v1.1 spec](https://github.com/libp2p/specs/blob/master/pubsub/gossipsub/gossipsub-v1.1.md) recommends this window be "small (in the order of milliseconds)" to prevent peers from gaming P3 scores by simply replaying messages back. A peer can echo a message within ~100ms, so a large window allows score inflation.
+
+However, real-world implementations use significantly larger values due to practical constraints:
+- **Prysm** (Go): 2 seconds - the go-libp2p default for low-latency Go runtime
+- **Lodestar** (TypeScript): 12 seconds - accounts for JavaScript I/O lag
+- **Ethereum spec proposal**: 400ms was proposed but rejected as "too tight"
+
+We use **5 seconds** as a balanced middle ground because:
+1. **Runtime considerations**: Our implementation is TypeScript (like Lodestar), not Go (like Prysm). JavaScript has higher I/O latency due to single-threaded event loop and garbage collection pauses.
+2. **Network variance**: Even on healthy networks, message propagation can vary due to:
+   - Concurrent validation of multiple messages
+   - CPU-intensive proof verification
+   - Network congestion during high transaction volume
+   - Geographic distribution of validators
+3. **Conservative but not excessive**: 5s is 2.5× the Go default (allowing for JS overhead) but still well below Lodestar's 12s, maintaining reasonable protection against replay attacks.
+4. **Attack mitigation**: A 5s window still prevents score gaming - peers would need to consistently echo messages within 5s to maintain positive P3 scores, which requires them to stay connected and somewhat functional.
+
+## meshMessageDeliveriesActivation
+
+This is the grace period before P3 penalties can be applied to a peer. During this time, the message delivery counter accumulates without any penalty.
+
+**Why activation is 5× the decay window:**
+
+We set activation time to **5× the decay window** (10-25 slots depending on topic frequency) because:
+
+1. **Timer starts at mesh join, not first message**: The activation countdown begins when a peer joins the mesh, not when they receive their first message. During network bootstrap, peers may join before any messages are flowing.
+
+2. **Bootstrap grace period**: When the network is starting up, message flow may be delayed. Peers need time for the network to stabilize and messages to start propagating.
+
+3. **Counter convergence**: The threshold is set at 30% of the *converged* counter value. If activation is too short, the counter hasn't approached convergence yet, and honest peers could be penalized unfairly.
+
+4. **Join timing variance**: Peers may join at any point during a slot. With longer activation time, even peers joining at an unlucky time will have accumulated enough messages before penalties start.
+
+5. **Ethereum precedent**: Ethereum's Lodestar implementation uses very long activation times (1-2 epochs ≈ 16-32 slots) for similar reasons.
+
+| Topic | Decay Window | Activation Time (5×) |
+|-------|--------------|----------------------|
+| checkpoint_proposal | 5 slots (360s) | 25 slots (1800s / 30min) |
+| block_proposal | 3 slots (216s) | 15 slots (1080s / 18min) |
+| checkpoint_attestation | 2 slots (144s) | 10 slots (720s / 12min) |
+
+## P1: Time in Mesh (Positive Score)
+
+P1 rewards peers for time spent in the mesh. We use Lodestar-style slot-based normalization:
+
+```typescript
+timeInMeshQuantum = slotDurationMs          // Score increases by ~1 per slot
+timeInMeshCap = 3600 / slotDurationSeconds  // Cap at 1 hour (50 slots for 72s slots)
+timeInMeshWeight = MAX_P1_SCORE / cap       // Normalized so max P1 = 8
+```
+
+**Key properties:**
+- Score increases gradually: ~1 per slot of mesh membership
+- Caps at 1 hour: prevents runaway positive scores
+- Resets on mesh leave: no credit carried after pruning
+
+**Example (72s slots):**
+- After 10 minutes in mesh: P1 ≈ 1.3
+- After 30 minutes in mesh: P1 ≈ 4
+- After 1 hour in mesh: P1 = 8 (max)
+
+## P2: First Message Deliveries (Positive Score)
+
+P2 rewards peers who deliver messages first to us. We use convergence-based normalization:
+
+```typescript
+firstMessageDeliveriesDecay = computeDecay(2 slots)  // Fast decay
+firstMessageDeliveriesCap = convergence(1 msg/heartbeat)
+firstMessageDeliveriesWeight = MAX_P2_SCORE / cap    // Normalized so max P2 = 25
+```
+
+**Key properties:**
+- Fast decay (2 slots): rewards recent behavior, not historical
+- Caps at convergence: prevents score inflation from bursts
+- Resets quickly after mesh leave: decays to near-zero over ~2 slots (e.g., ~144s with 72s slots)
+
+## P3 Weight Formula
+
+The P3 weight is calculated to ensure the max penalty equals `MAX_P3_PENALTY_PER_TOPIC` (-34):
+
+```typescript
+// Weight formula: max_penalty / threshold²
+meshMessageDeliveriesWeight = MAX_P3_PENALTY_PER_TOPIC / (threshold * threshold)
+
+// When peer delivers nothing (deficit = threshold):
+// penalty = deficit² × weight = threshold² × (-34 / threshold²) = -34
+```
+
+This ensures P3 max penalty (-34) exceeds P1 + P2 max (+33), causing mesh pruning.
+
+## Per-Topic Configuration
+
+### Topic Types and Expected Rates
+
+| Topic | Expected/Slot | Decay Window | Notes |
+|-------|--------------|--------------|-------|
+| `tx` | Unpredictable | N/A | P3/P3b disabled |
+| `block_proposal` | N-1 | 3 slots | N = blocks per slot (MBPS mode) |
+| `checkpoint_proposal` | 1 | 5 slots | One per slot |
+| `checkpoint_attestation` | C (~48) | 2 slots | C = committee size |
+
+### Transactions (tx)
+
+Transactions are submitted unpredictably by users, so we cannot set meaningful delivery thresholds. **All scoring (P1, P2, P3, P3b) is disabled** for this topic except P4 (invalid message detection).
+
+**Rationale:** If P1/P2 were enabled without P3, the tx topic would contribute free positive scores that could offset penalties from other topics, preventing proper mesh pruning of non-contributing peers.
+
+### Block Proposals (block_proposal)
+
+Block proposal scoring is controlled by the `expectedBlockProposalsPerSlot` config (`SEQ_EXPECTED_BLOCK_PROPOSALS_PER_SLOT` env var):
+
+| Config Value | Behavior |
+|-------------|----------|
+| `0` (current default) | Block proposal P3 scoring is **disabled** |
+| Positive number | Uses the provided value as expected proposals per slot |
+| `undefined` | Falls back to `blocksPerSlot - 1` (MBPS mode: N-1, single block: 0) |
+
+**Current behavior note:** In the current implementation, if `SEQ_EXPECTED_BLOCK_PROPOSALS_PER_SLOT` is not set, config mapping applies `0` by default (scoring disabled). The `undefined` fallback above is currently reachable only if the value is explicitly provided as `undefined` in code.
+
+**Future intent:** Once throughput is stable, we may change env parsing/defaults so an unset env var resolves to `undefined` again (re-enabling automatic fallback to `blocksPerSlot - 1`).
+
+**Why disabled by default?** In MBPS mode, gossipsub expects N-1 block proposals per slot. When transaction throughput is low (as expected at launch), fewer blocks are actually built, causing peers to be incorrectly penalized for under-delivering block proposals. The default of 0 disables this scoring. Set to a positive value when throughput increases and block production is consistent.
+
+In MBPS mode (when enabled), N-1 block proposals are gossiped per slot (the last block is bundled with the checkpoint). In single-block mode, this is 0.
+
+### Checkpoint Proposals (checkpoint_proposal)
+
+Exactly one checkpoint proposal per slot, containing the final block and proof commitments.
+
+### Checkpoint Attestations (checkpoint_attestation)
+
+Each committee member sends one attestation per slot. With a target committee size of 48, we expect ~48 attestations per slot.
+
+### Topic Weights
+
+All topics use equal weight (1). Block proposals contain transaction hashes, so transactions must propagate for block proposals to validate - making all message types equally important for network health.
+
+## Configuration Dependencies
+
+The scoring parameters depend on:
+
+| Parameter | Source | Default |
+|-----------|--------|---------|
+| `slotDuration` | L1RollupConstants | 72s |
+| `targetCommitteeSize` | L1RollupConstants | 48 |
+| `heartbeatInterval` | P2PConfig.gossipsubInterval | 700ms |
+| `blockDurationMs` | P2PConfig.blockDurationMs | undefined (single block) |
+| `expectedBlockProposalsPerSlot` | P2PConfig.expectedBlockProposalsPerSlot | 0 (disabled; current unset-env behavior) |
+
+## Invalid Message Handling (P4)
+
+P4 penalizes peers who deliver invalid messages. All topics have this enabled with:
+- Weight: -20
+- Decay: Over 4 slots
+
+Invalid messages include malformed data, invalid signatures, or messages failing validation.
+
+## Tuning Guidelines
+
+### Signs of Too-Strict Scoring
+
+- Honest peers frequently pruned from mesh
+- High peer churn
+- Slow message propagation despite good network
+
+**Solution:** Increase thresholds, use longer decay windows
+
+### Signs of Too-Lenient Scoring
+
+- Slow or stalled message propagation
+- Bad peers remaining in mesh too long
+- Network vulnerable to eclipse attacks
+
+**Solution:** Decrease thresholds, use shorter decay windows
+
+### Monitoring
+
+Key metrics to monitor:
+- Peer scores distribution
+- P3 penalty frequency per topic
+- Invalid message rate per peer
+- Mesh membership stability
+
+## Code Structure
+
+- `scoring.ts` - Global peer score thresholds
+- `topic_score_params.ts` - Per-topic parameter calculation
+- `index.ts` - Module exports
+
+## Global Score Thresholds
+
+Gossipsub uses global thresholds to determine peer behavior based on total score:
+
+| Threshold | Value | Effect |
+|-----------|-------|--------|
+| gossipThreshold | -500 | Below this, peer doesn't receive gossip |
+| publishThreshold | -1000 | Below this, peer's messages aren't relayed |
+| graylistThreshold | -2000 | Below this, all RPCs from peer are ignored |
+
+### Alignment with Application-Level Scoring
+
+The thresholds are designed to align with Aztec's application-level peer scoring:
+
+```
+Total Gossipsub Score = TopicScore + (AppScore × AppSpecificWeight)
+```
+
+With `appSpecificWeight = 10` (topic score assumed ~0):
+
+| App Score State | App Score | Gossipsub Contribution | Threshold Triggered |
+|-----------------|-----------|------------------------|---------------------|
+| Healthy | 0 to -49 | 0 to -490 | None |
+| Disconnect | -50 | -500 | gossipThreshold |
+| Ban | -100 | -1000 | publishThreshold |
+
+This means (best-effort alignment):
+- When a peer reaches **Disconnect** state, they generally stop receiving gossip
+- When a peer reaches **Ban** state, their messages are generally not relayed
+- **Graylist** requires ban-level score PLUS significant topic penalties (attacks)
+
+**Important:** Positive topic scores (P1/P2) can temporarily offset app penalties, so alignment is not strict.
+Conversely, if topic scores are low, a peer slightly above the disconnect threshold may still dip below `gossipThreshold`. This is acceptable and tends to recover quickly as topic scores accumulate.
+
+### Topic Score Contribution
+
+Topic scores provide **burst response** to attacks, while app score provides **stable baseline**:
+
+- P1 (time in mesh): Max +8 per topic (+16 default, +24 with block proposal scoring enabled)
+- P2 (first deliveries): Max +25 per topic (+50 default, +75 with block proposal scoring, but decays fast)
+- P3 (under-delivery): Max -34 per topic (-68 default with 2 topics, -102 with block proposal scoring enabled)
+- P4 (invalid messages): -20 per invalid message, can spike to -2000+ during attacks
+
+Example attack scenario:
+- App score: -100 (banned) → -1000 gossipsub
+- P4 burst (10 invalid messages): -2000 per topic
+- **Total: -3000+** → Triggers graylistThreshold
+
+The P4 penalty decays to 1% over 4 slots (~5 minutes), allowing recovery if the attack stops.
+
+## Non-Contributing Peers
+
+### How P3 Handles Under-Delivery
+
+The P3 (meshMessageDeliveries) penalty applies when a peer's message delivery counter falls below the threshold. The penalty formula is:
+
+```
+deficit = max(0, threshold - counter)
+penalty = deficit² × weight
+```
+
+Where `weight = MAX_P3_PENALTY_PER_TOPIC / (threshold × threshold)`. This design ensures:
+
+```
+If counter = 0 (delivers nothing):
+  deficit = threshold
+  penalty = threshold² × (-34/threshold²) = -34 per topic
+```
+
+### Score Balance for Mesh Pruning
+
+For a peer to be pruned from the mesh, their **topic score** must be negative. We balance P1/P2/P3 so that non-contributors get pruned:
+
+| Scenario | P1 | P2 | P3 | Topic Score | Result |
+|----------|----|----|-----|-------------|--------|
+| Healthy peer (delivering) | +8 | +25 | 0 | +33 | In mesh |
+| New peer (just joined) | +1 | +5 | 0 | +6 | In mesh |
+| Non-contributor (1 hour in mesh) | +8 | 0 | -34 | **-26** | **Pruned** |
+| Non-contributor (new) | +1 | 0 | -34 | **-33** | **Pruned** |
+
+The key insight: **P3 max (-34) exceeds P1 + P2 max (+33)**, so even a peer that has been in the mesh for 1 hour will still be pruned if they stop delivering messages.
+
+### What Happens After Pruning
+
+When a peer is pruned from the mesh:
+
+1. **P1 resets to 0**: The timeInMesh counter is cleared
+2. **P2 decays to 0**: Fast decay (2-slot window) makes it negligible over minutes
+3. **P3b captures the penalty**: The P3 deficit at prune time becomes P3b, which decays slowly
+
+After pruning, the peer's score consists mainly of P3b:
+- **Total P3b: -68** (default, 2 topics) or **-102** (with block proposal scoring enabled, 3 topics)
+- **Recovery time**: P3b decays to ~1% over one decay window (2-5 slots = 2-6 minutes)
+- **Grafting eligibility**: Peer can be grafted when score ≥ 0, but asymptotic decay means recovery is slow
+
+### Why Non-Contributors Aren't Disconnected
+
+With P3b capped at -68 (default, 2 topics) or -102 (with block proposal scoring, 3 topics) after pruning:
+
+| Threshold | Value | P3b Score | Triggered? |
+|-----------|-------|-----------|------------|
+| gossipThreshold | -500 | -68 (default) / -102 (block scoring on) | No |
+| publishThreshold | -1000 | -68 (default) / -102 (block scoring on) | No |
+| graylistThreshold | -2000 | -68 (default) / -102 (block scoring on) | No |
+
+**A score of -68 or -102 is well above -500**, so non-contributing peers:
+- Are pruned from mesh (good - stops them slowing propagation)
+- Still receive gossip (can recover by reconnecting/restarting)
+- Are NOT disconnected unless they also have application-level penalties
+
+### Design Philosophy
+
+The system distinguishes between:
+
+| Peer Type | Score Range | Effect |
+|-----------|-------------|--------|
+| **Productive** | ≥ 0 | Full mesh participation |
+| **Unproductive** | -1 to -499 | Pruned from mesh, still receives gossip |
+| **Misbehaving** | -500 to -999 | Stops receiving gossip (app: Disconnect) |
+| **Malicious** | -1000 to -1999 | Cannot publish (app: Banned) |
+| **Attacking** | ≤ -2000 | Graylisted, all RPCs ignored |
+
+Note: These ranges are approximate; positive topic scores can shift a peer upward temporarily.
+
+This is similar to Ethereum's approach: non-contributing peers are removed from the mesh (preventing them from slowing propagation) but not disconnected, as they might be starting up or experiencing temporary connectivity issues.
+
+### When Non-Contributors ARE Penalized
+
+Non-contributors will trigger thresholds if they also:
+1. **Send invalid messages**: P4 penalty of -20 per invalid message accumulates quickly
+2. **Fail protocol validation**: Application penalties for deserialization errors, manipulation attempts
+3. **Violate rate limits**: Repeated per-peer limit hits accumulate application penalties
+
+## Application-Level Penalties
+
+Beyond gossipsub's topic scoring, Aztec has application-level penalties for protocol violations:
+
+### Penalty Severities
+
+| Severity | Points | Errors to Disconnect | Errors to Ban |
+|----------|--------|----------------------|---------------|
+| **HighToleranceError** | 2 | 25 | 50 |
+| **MidToleranceError** | 10 | 5 | 10 |
+| **LowToleranceError** | 50 | 1 | 2 |
+
+### What Triggers Each Severity
+
+**HighToleranceError (2 points)** - Transient issues:
+- Rate limit exceeded
+- Failed responses (FAILURE/UNKNOWN status)
+- Recent double spend attempts (within penalty window)
+
+**MidToleranceError (10 points)** - Protocol violations:
+- Block/checkpoint exceeds per-slot cap
+- Response hash mismatches
+- Duplicate transactions in response
+- Unrequested transactions in response
+
+**LowToleranceError (50 points)** - Serious violations:
+- Message deserialization errors
+- Invalid message manipulation attempts
+- Block number/order mismatches
+- Invalid transactions
+- Badly formed requests
+- Confirmed double spends
+
+### Score Decay
+
+Application scores decay by 10% per minute (`decayFactor = 0.9`):
+- Score -100 → -90 after 1 minute
+- Score -100 → -35 after 10 minutes
+- Score -100 → -12 after 20 minutes
+
+This allows honest peers to recover from temporary issues.
+
+## Score Calculation Examples
+
+### Example 1: Honest Peer
+
+```
+App score: 0
+Topic P3: 0 (delivering messages)
+Topic P4: 0 (no invalid messages)
+─────────────────────────────────
+Total: 0 → Full participation ✓
+```
+
+### Example 2: Peer with Rate Limit Issues
+
+```
+App score: -20 (10 HighToleranceErrors)
+  → Gossipsub contribution: -200
+Topic P3: -1 (slightly under-delivering)
+Topic P4: 0
+─────────────────────────────────
+Total: -201 → Still receives gossip ✓
+```
+
+### Example 3: Validation Failure
+
+```
+App score: -50 (1 LowToleranceError for invalid message)
+  → Gossipsub contribution: -500
+Topic P3: 0
+Topic P4: -20 (the invalid message)
+─────────────────────────────────
+Total: -520 → Stops receiving gossip (gossipThreshold = -500)
+              → Application disconnects peer
+```
+
+### Example 4: Banned Peer
+
+```
+App score: -100 (2 LowToleranceErrors)
+  → Gossipsub contribution: -1000
+Topic P3: -2
+Topic P4: -40 (2 invalid messages)
+─────────────────────────────────
+Total: -1042 → Cannot publish (publishThreshold = -1000)
+               → Application bans peer
+```
+
+### Example 5: Active Attack (Burst of Invalid Messages)
+
+```
+App score: -100 (banned)
+  → Gossipsub contribution: -1000
+Topic P3: -3
+Topic P4: -200 (10 invalid messages: 10 × -20)
+─────────────────────────────────
+Total: -1203 → Cannot publish (publishThreshold = -1000)
+
+If the attacker sends 100 invalid messages quickly:
+
+Topic P4: -2000 (100 invalid messages: 100 × -20)
+─────────────────────────────────
+Total: -3003 → Graylisted (graylistThreshold = -2000)
+               → All RPCs ignored
+```
+
+### Example 6: Recovery After Attack
+
+```
+Initial state: Total score -3003
+
+After 4 slots (~5 min):
+  P4 decays to 1%: -2000 → -20
+  App score unchanged: -1000
+  Total: -1023 → Still banned, but no longer graylisted
+
+After 10 min:
+  App score decays: -100 → -35 → -350 contribution
+  P4 further decayed: ~-5
+  Total: -358 → Above gossipThreshold, starting to recover
+```
+
+## Network Outage Analysis
+
+What happens when a peer experiences a network outage and stops delivering messages?
+
+### During the Outage
+
+While the peer is disconnected:
+
+1. **P3 penalty accumulates**: The message delivery counter decays toward 0, causing increasing P3 penalty
+2. **Max P3 penalty reached**: Once counter drops below threshold, penalty hits -34 per topic (-68 default, -102 with block proposal scoring)
+3. **Mesh pruning**: Topic score goes negative → peer is pruned from mesh
+4. **P3b captures penalty**: The P3 deficit at prune time becomes P3b (sticky penalty)
+
+### Outage Timeline
+
+| Time | Event | Score Impact |
+|------|-------|--------------|
+| 0s | Outage begins | P3 = 0 |
+| ~1 decay window (2-5 slots) | Counter decays below threshold | P3 starts decreasing |
+| ~1-2 decay windows | Counter approaches 0 | P3 ≈ -34 per topic |
+| ~1-2 decay windows | Peer pruned from mesh | P3b ≈ -34 per topic |
+| Thereafter | P3b decays slowly | Recovery begins |
+
+Note: If the peer just joined the mesh, P3 penalties only start after
+`meshMessageDeliveriesActivation` (10-25 slots depending on topic frequency).
+
+### Key Insight: No Application Penalties
+
+During a network outage, the peer:
+- **Does NOT send invalid messages** → No P4 penalty
+- **Does NOT violate protocols** → No application-level penalty
+- **Only accumulates topic-level penalties** → Max -68 (default) or -102 (with block proposal scoring)
+
+This is the crucial difference from malicious behavior:
+
+| Scenario | App Score | Topic Score | Total | Threshold Hit |
+|----------|-----------|-------------|-------|---------------|
+| Network outage | 0 | -68 (default) / -102 (block scoring on) | -68 / -102 | None |
+| Validation failure | -50 | -20 | -520 | gossipThreshold |
+| Malicious peer | -100 | -2000+ | -2100+ | graylistThreshold |
+
+### Recovery After Outage
+
+When the peer reconnects:
+
+1. **Peer re-joins mesh**: Can request graft (topic score must be > 0 for acceptance)
+2. **P3b decays**: To ~1% over decay window (2-5 slots depending on topic)
+3. **P1 restarts from 0**: timeInMesh counter begins accumulating
+4. **P2 restarts from 0**: firstMessageDeliveries counter begins accumulating
+
+**Recovery timeline:**
+- Immediate: Peer can attempt to re-graft
+- ~3-5 minutes: P3b decays to near-zero
+- ~10+ minutes: P1 builds up again (if staying in mesh)
+
+### Why This Design Works
+
+The system correctly distinguishes between:
+
+| Behavior | Treatment |
+|----------|-----------|
+| **Network issues** | Pruned from mesh (stops slowing propagation), can recover quickly |
+| **Protocol violations** | Disconnected (gossipThreshold), must wait for app score decay |
+| **Malicious activity** | Banned/graylisted, requires both app and topic score decay |
+
+A peer experiencing network problems will:
+- Be temporarily removed from mesh propagation (good for network health)
+- NOT be disconnected or banned (they haven't misbehaved)
+- Recover automatically when connectivity returns
+- Retain their connections for recovery
+
+This matches Ethereum's approach: **honest peers with temporary issues are inconvenienced but not punished**.
+
+### Rate Limiting During Outages
+
+Note: Simply not sending messages does NOT trigger rate limit penalties. Rate limits apply to:
+- **Per-peer rate limit exceeded** → HighToleranceError (2 points)
+- **Other protocol violations** → MidToleranceError or LowToleranceError depending on severity
+
+A peer that sends nothing receives no rate limit penalties. The only penalty for not delivering messages is P3, which is explicitly designed to be recoverable.
+
+## References
+
+- [Gossipsub v1.1 Specification](https://github.com/libp2p/specs/blob/master/pubsub/gossipsub/gossipsub-v1.1.md)
+- [Lighthouse Scoring Implementation](https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/blob/stable/beacon_node/lighthouse_network/src/peer_manager/score.rs)
+- [Lodestar Scoring Implementation](https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/tree/unstable/packages/beacon-node/src/network/gossip)

package/src/services/gossipsub/index.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+export * from './scoring.js';
+export * from './topic_score_params.js';

package/src/services/gossipsub/scoring.ts

@@ -1,13 +1,37 @@
 import type { PeerScoreThresholds } from '@chainsafe/libp2p-gossipsub/score';
 
 /**
- * The following params is implemented by Lighthouse at
- * https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/blob/b0ac3464ca5fb1e9d75060b56c83bfaf990a3d25/beacon_node/eth2_libp2p/src/behaviour/gossipsub_scoring_parameters.rs#L83
+ * Weight applied to application-level peer scores before contributing to gossipsub score.
+ *
+ * Note: positive topic scores can partially offset app penalties, so alignment with
+ * app-level thresholds is best-effort rather than strict.
+ */
+export const APP_SPECIFIC_WEIGHT = 10;
+
+/**
+ * Gossipsub peer score thresholds aligned with application-level scoring.
+ *
+ * These thresholds work with appSpecificWeight=10 to align gossipsub behavior
+ * with application-level peer states (Healthy → Disconnect → Banned).
+ *
+ * Alignment:
+ * - gossipThreshold (-500): Matches Disconnect state (app score -50 × weight 10)
+ * - publishThreshold (-1000): Matches Ban state (app score -100 × weight 10)
+ * - graylistThreshold (-2000): For severe attacks (ban + topic penalties)
+ *
+ * The 1:2:4 ratio follows Lodestar's approach and gossipsub spec recommendations.
+ *
+ * @see https://github.com/libp2p/specs/blob/master/pubsub/gossipsub/gossipsub-v1.1.md#peer-scoring
  */
 export const gossipScoreThresholds: PeerScoreThresholds = {
-  gossipThreshold: -4000,
-  publishThreshold: -8000,
-  graylistThreshold: -16000,
+  /** Below this, peer is not gossiped to (matches Disconnect state) */
+  gossipThreshold: -500,
+  /** Below this, self-published messages are not propagated to peer (matches Ban state) */
+  publishThreshold: -1000,
+  /** Below this, all RPCs from peer are ignored (severe attack scenario) */
+  graylistThreshold: -2000,
+  /** Above this, peer can offer peer exchange (PX) */
   acceptPXThreshold: 100,
+  /** Above this, peer can be grafted to mesh opportunistically */
   opportunisticGraftThreshold: 5,
 };