Address comment:

• Update doxygen doc
• Rename getProof => getLocalProof which is more accurate

Also make the proof optional a reference in init.cpp

rename LOWEST_VALID_SCORE -> MIN_VALID_PROOF_SCORE

This can be abandoned in favor of D9418. The reference to an optional proof is better than a bare pointer.

check also return value of addProof is true

I get the point that a node that does not vote is not a full avalanche peer. But it can still be a "limited avalanche peer", if it wants to receive and relay proofs, so it can be aware of other avalanche nodes. We will need some other way of signalling the "limited avalanche" state.

Working on splitting this in smaller pieces, with some refactoring :
D9423

Revert to original master key/session key intent, rebase on top of D9422 to remove verification from init.cpp

I think I just had a better idea: do the proof verification inside fetchCreatePeer, so that we don't need another public method adding a proof (getProofId already does that).

remove the dummy state that is thrown away so that the output argument is actually used

In D9414#213632, @deadalnix wrote:

Wouldn't moving away imply to not do the translation in more and more places over time?

Is that causing an actual problem for that mining software?

On a side, note, if we commit to the proof score being the amount in satoshi, how do we handle overflows?

new attempt at getting this unstuck: restore the proof_random test as close as possible to its initial state, don't test for the ProofValidationResult::DUST_THRESOLD, just make sure the score given to buildRandomProof is always valid.

Wouldn't moving away imply to not do the translation in more and more places over time?

got it

Updated the summary with the correct commit link.

is https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/831/commits/20448b8d09a492afcfcae7721033c13a44a776fd a skip? it's linked in the summary but this is a diff for: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/831/commits/1f233b3fa05eb29a744487e0682d925055fb0d4c