Header, Body, And Virtual Pipeline

What this page explains#

The consensus pipeline explains where headers, bodies, transactions, and virtual state are processed. This page sits in Core Protocol Source Path. It gives the topic a plain-language handle first, then shows the working idea, the mechanism, the source trail, and any limits that still matter. This category is a code-reading path. It treats source files as evidence with boundaries: a constant proves one kind of thing, a pipeline proves another, and a test proves only the scenario it covers.

The writing follows a simple Kaspa documentation pattern: answer the practical question first, then link outward for details. The closest public sources for this page are RK-HEADER-PIPELINE, RK-BODY-PIPELINE, RK-VIRTUAL-PIPELINE, RK-TX-VALIDATION. Local notes can help choose what to explain, but public-facing references resolve to upstream websites, repositories, papers, release pages, or docs.

How to think about it#

The practical model starts by naming the layer that owns the topic: wallet use, node operation, consensus, transaction validation, Toccata script behavior, tooling, or research. From there, the page shows which public source can support the explanation and where the explanation becomes incomplete.

For Header, Body, And Virtual Pipeline, the model is built around these anchors: header processing handles header-level checks and proof of work context; body processing brings transaction lists and block content into scope; transaction validation checks isolation and UTXO context; virtual processing applies accepted state consequences; errors belong to different layers and should not be collapsed. This model is useful, but it does not encode every constant, branch, error type, or edge case. Those details belong in the source path and the source notes.

How it works#

1. header processing handles header-level checks and proof of work context. Mining and proof-of-work explanations belong to the node/miner path, not the ZK path. The node prepares candidate block templates from consensus and mempool state; mining hardware or pool software searches for acceptable work. Hardware catalogs and profitability references are volatile, while the durable protocol boundary is proof of work verification and template validity.

2. body processing brings transaction lists and block content into scope. Core protocol source pages explain which subsystem owns the behavior. The reader should come away knowing whether the evidence belongs in params, constants, proof of work, header processing, body processing, virtual processing, DAA, pruning, reachability, storage, or tests.

3. transaction validation checks isolation and UTXO context. Validation pages separate layers that are often confused. Shape checks, activation context, UTXO context, mass/resource checks, script execution, covenant context, and error ownership each reject different mistakes. A useful guide traces the rejected transaction to the layer that owns the failure.

4. virtual processing applies accepted state consequences. Virtual state is the bridge from ordered consensus consequences into the state surfaces that tools can inspect. Mempool visibility says a node is considering a transaction; accepted evidence says the transaction was incorporated through consensus processing. UTXO diffs, accepting data, and indexer replay are the review trail for applications that need durable state.

5. errors belong to different layers and should not be collapsed. Validation pages separate layers that are often confused. Shape checks, activation context, UTXO context, mass/resource checks, script execution, covenant context, and error ownership each reject different mistakes. A useful guide traces the rejected transaction to the layer that owns the failure.

This mechanism section is a source checking guide. Each paragraph names the subsystem that owns the claim and keeps constants, params, pipelines, tests, releases, and KIPs in their own evidence lanes.

How to check it#

When using this page for source review, start with the claim class, then read the owner module, tests, KIP or release context, and any dependent interface. Record what the source proves and what it does not prove before strengthening wiki wording.

Related Pages#

• rusty-kaspa-consensus-map
• core-protocol-source-path
• pow-and-kheavyhash