The lack of chain-specific information (such as name or ID) in the Ethereum address format creates several interoperability challenges.

e.g. L1 to L2 txs require an aliased `msg.sender`. 

How can the address format be improved to address this issue?

3770 makes life easier at the dapp level. 

How do you imagine the L1->L2 tx to look beyond what they are today? Somehow sending a tx directly between them without being relayed to some specified address?

Co-Founder @Sablier. Interested in crypto, longevity, physics, and epistemology.


Building @onit to be the home of multiplayer crypto  🌀 @variant VFF '23 💡 writing: https://mirror.xyz/jamesmccomish.eth

3770 makes life easier at the dapp level. 

How do you imagine the L1->L2 tx to look beyond what they are today? Somehow sending a tx directly between them without being relayed to some specified address?

https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-3770

It's a thorny one, I remember conversations in 2021 about extending address from 20 to 32 bytes (for collision resistance + the plan to tag address with their state expiry "epochs").

Here's a bunch of links about approaches there:

It's a thorny one, I remember conversations in 2021 about extending address from 20 to 32 bytes (for collision resistance + the plan to tag address with their state expiry "epochs").

Here's a bunch of links about approaches there: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/thoughts-on-address-space-extension-ase/6779