Make --eth1_withdrawal_address required

[hwwhww]

No description provided.

[yorickdowne]

This feels a bit heavy-handed. Making it default, with an override to create BLS credentials, sure. Required feels a little much.

Some folk prefer BLS credentials so their consensus layer rewards don’t become income for tax purposes every 5 ish days, and they control when they do.

That depends heavily on jurisdiction and even where possible may not be desirable.

To still offer the option to create 0x00 credentials seems reasonable though.

[barnabasbusa]

I'm also against this. I'd like to see some kind of warning, in case that the user forgets to set a withdrawal address, but I would most definitely not force them to set one. There are plenty of use cases where 0x00 addresses can be still useful in the future.
I would personally also like to see stake-house/wagyu-key-gen#153 reverted in wagyu.

[PizBernina]

This will lead to some challenges depending on the jurisdiction one is in and the complexity of a setup.
Please, do not force users but let them decide. If you must, why not adding a "it is recommended to set an eth1..."

[CarlBeek]

Although, I was initially encouraged removing the option for BLS-withdrawal keys, I have also come around to not removing them.

That said, I still think we should change the default so that people favour execution withdrawals and opt in to bls-withdrawals should they prefer.

[yorickdowne]

Agreed 100%. Please default to 0x01 credential version, and offer BLS 0x00 as opt-in.

[wackerow]

Similarly. Initially didn't see any logical reason to not unlock your funds, but I can certainly respect the complicated nuances of tax law, and agree that in hindsight, don't think we need to forcefully take this option away from stakers.

Totally on board with making this "default" but not "required". If users choose 0x00, I would suggest something in the UX to make users away that this will prevent reward payments from being distributed, and will eventually require an additional step to enable.