--- tags: template --- # HIP Template ``` hip: <to be assigned> title: Yield farming pools author: <a list of the author's or authors' name(s) and/or username(s), or name(s) and email(s), e.g. (use with the parentheses or triangular brackets): FirstName LastName (@GitHubUsername), FirstName LastName <foo@bar.com>, FirstName (@GitHubUsername) and GitHubUsername (@GitHubUsername)> discussions-to: <URL> status: Draft type: <Standards Track | Meta | Informational> category (*only required for Standard Track): <Core | Networking | Interface | ERC> created: <date created on, in ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd) format> requires (*optional): <HIP number(s)> replaces (*optional): <HIP number(s)> ``` <!--You can leave these HTML comments in your merged HIP and delete the visible duplicate text guides, they will not appear and may be helpful to refer to if you edit it again. This is the suggested template for new HIPs. Note that an HIP number will be assigned by an editor. When opening a pull request to submit your HIP, please use an abbreviated title in the filename, `hip-draft_title_abbrev.md`. The title should be 44 characters or less.--> This is the suggested template for new HIPs. Note that an HIP number will be assigned by an editor. When opening a pull request to submit your HIP, please use an abbreviated title in the filename, `hip-draft_title_abbrev.md`. The title should be 44 characters or less. ## Simple Summary <!--"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Provide a simplified and layman-accessible explanation of the HIP.--> If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Provide a simplified and layman-accessible explanation of the HIP. ## Abstract <!--A short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed.--> A short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed. ## Motivation <!--The motivation is critical for HIPs that want to change the Ethereum protocol. It should clearly explain why the existing protocol specification is inadequate to address the problem that the HIP solves. HIP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright.--> The motivation is critical for HIPs that want to change the Ethereum protocol. It should clearly explain why the existing protocol specification is inadequate to address the problem that the HIP solves. HIP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright. ## Specification <!--The technical specification 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 (go-ethereum, parity, cpp-ethereum, ethereumj, ethereumjs, and [others](https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Clients)).--> The technical specification 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 (go-ethereum, parity, cpp-ethereum, ethereumj, ethereumjs, and [others](https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Clients)). ## 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 rationale may also provide evidence of consensus within the community, and should discuss important objections or concerns raised during discussion.--> 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 rationale may also provide evidence of consensus within the community, and should discuss important objections or concerns raised during discussion.--> ## Backwards Compatibility <!--All HIPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The HIP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. HIP submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright.--> All HIPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The HIP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. HIP submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright. ## Test Cases <!--Test cases for an implementation are mandatory for HIPs that are affecting consensus changes. Other HIPs can choose to include links to test cases if applicable.--> Test cases for an implementation are mandatory for HIPs that are affecting consensus changes. Other HIPs can choose to include links to test cases if applicable. ## Implementation <!--The implementations must be completed before any HIP is given status "Final", but it need not be completed before the HIP is accepted. While there is merit to the approach of reaching consensus on the specification and rationale before writing code, the principle of "rough consensus and running code" is still useful when it comes to resolving many discussions of API details.--> The implementations must be completed before any HIP is given status "Final", but it need not be completed before the HIP is accepted. While there is merit to the approach of reaching consensus on the specification and rationale before writing code, the principle of "rough consensus and running code" is still useful when it comes to resolving many discussions of API details. ## Security Considerations <!--All HIPs 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. E.g. 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. HIP submissions missing the "Security Considerations" section will be rejected. An HIP cannot proceed to status "Final" without a Security Considerations discussion deemed sufficient by the reviewers.--> All HIPs 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. E.g. 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. HIP submissions missing the "Security Considerations" section will be rejected. An HIP cannot proceed to status "Final" without a Security Considerations discussion deemed sufficient by the reviewers. ## Copyright Copyright and related rights waived via [CC0](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/).