Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
1/15 Our latest report: “Make Ethereum Whole Again: Sequencing the Future with Based Rollups and Preconfirmations”, delves into based rollups and preconfirmations. What are they? How do they work together? And what problems are they solving? 🧵 https://paragraph.xyz/@lemniscap/make-ethereum-whole-again
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
2/15 Ethereum's rollup-centric roadmap has accelerated transactions, reduced costs, and enabled new low-latency dapps. Yet, it has also led to fragmentation and centralization issues at L2, and doubts about value accrual at L1.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
3/15 The problem is that L2s create liquidity silos, complicating asset transfers and limiting composability. This fragmentation dilutes network effects, creating a negative-sum game where newer and smaller L2s struggle against larger ones.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
4/15 On top of that, the traditional single-sequencer rollup poses risks of rent extraction and censorship. Shared sequencer layers decentralize this process and offer a unified transaction ordering mechanism across multiple rollups, but a new layer means new trust assumptions.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
5/15 Based rollups offer an alternative solution - the key distinction being, who is sequencing? Instead of a centralized sequencer or shared layer, based rollups re-use Ethereum builders to pick up pending transactions in L2 mempools and order them.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
6/15 As these builders sequence both the L1 and L2 blocks, there is no need to rely on the L2 single sequencer to manage transaction sequencing. Instead, the design leverages Ethereum’s existing validators, providing a reliable and credibly neutral transport layer.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
7/15 But while based rollups offer various advantages in terms of decentralization, security, and economic alignment, they simply cannot provide fast transaction confirmations like centralized sequencers due to Ethereum's block time constraints.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
8/15 Enter Based Preconfirmations @justindrake proposed based preconfs in Nov 2023 to solve this constrant. This approach involves Ethereum L1 proposers offering credible promises of future tx execution for tips, and these promises can be made very fast.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
9/15 The benefits for Ethereum's UX are manifold: stronger assurances than soft confirmations, fast commitments (~20 ms in @taikoxyz test env), gasless txs (in @puffer-finance's design), social alignment, x-chain atomic inclusion, and the promise of synchronous composability.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
10/15 Ethereum is having its "Fedwire moment." Just as Fedwire enabled seamless transactions across regional banks, shared sequencers and now based preconfirmations could unify rollups, facilitating efficient and decentralized asset transfers across the Ethereum universe.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
11/15 Based preconfs are also important wrt L1-L2 economics. EIP-4844 blobs have slashed L2 costs by substantially reducing base layer DA costs, but also cut Ethereum's revenue and burn rates. Post-EIP-4844, margins going to L2s are at ATHs and Ethereum revenue is down ~70%.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Lemniscap pfp
Lemniscap
@lemniscap
12/15 "Going based" could balance L1-L2 economics by improving composability and "growing the pie" for all L2s, introducing preconf tips at L1, and making MEV extraction more efficient. Overall, fostering a more integrated Ethereum ecosystem.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction