Note that an DCIP number will be assigned by an editor. When opening a pull request to submit your DCIP, please use an abbreviated title in the filename, `dcip-draft_title_abbrev.md`.
The Abstract is a multi-sentence (short paragraph) technical summary. This should be a very terse and human-readable version of the specification section. Someone should be able to read only the abstract to get the gist of what this specification does.
The motivation section should include a description of any nontrivial problems the DCIP solves. It should not describe how the DCIP solves those problems, unless it is not immediately obvious. It should not describe why the DCIP should be made into a standard, unless it is not immediately obvious.
With a few exceptions, external links are not allowed. If you feel that a particular resource would demonstrate a compelling case for your DCIP, then save it as a printer-friendly PDF, put it in the assets folder, and link to that copy.
The Specification section should describe the syntax and semantics of any new feature. The specification should be detailed enough to allow competing, interoperable implementations for any of the current Ethereum platforms (besu, erigon, ethereumjs, go-ethereum, nethermind, or others).
It is recommended to follow RFC 2119 and RFC 8170. Do not remove the key word definitions if RFC 2119 and RFC 8170 are followed.
TODO: Remove this comment before submitting
-->
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 and RFC 8174.
## Rationale
<!--
The rationale fleshes out the specification by describing what motivated the design and why particular design decisions were made. It should describe alternate designs that were considered and related work, e.g. how the feature is supported in other languages.
The current placeholder is acceptable for a draft.
All DCIPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The DCIP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. DCIP submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright.
The Test Cases section should include expected input/output pairs, but may include a succinct set of executable tests. It should not include project build files. No new requirements may be be introduced here (meaning an implementation following only the Specification section should pass all tests here.)
If the test suite is too large to reasonably be included inline, then consider adding it as one or more files in `../assets/dcip-####/`. External links will not be allowed
The Reference Implementation section should include a minimal implementation that assists in understanding or implementing this specification. It should not include project build files. The reference implementation is not a replacement for the Specification section, and the proposal should still be understandable without it.
If the reference implementation is too large to reasonably be included inline, then consider adding it as one or more files in `../assets/dcip-####/`. External links will not be allowed.
All DCIPs must contain a section that discusses the security implications/considerations relevant to the proposed change. Include information that might be important for security discussions, surfaces risks and can be used throughout the life cycle of the proposal. For example, include security-relevant design decisions, concerns, important discussions, implementation-specific guidance and pitfalls, an outline of threats and risks and how they are being addressed. DCIP submissions missing the "Security Considerations" section will be rejected. An DCIP cannot proceed to status "Final" without a Security Considerations discussion deemed sufficient by the reviewers.
