The creator of Ethereum (ETH) put forth two sophisticated concepts to improve the security and resource efficiency of L1/L2 bridging, as well as an attempt to provide a more straightforward classification of Layer-2 solutions on top of Ethereum (ETH).
From reading bridges to validation bridges: Vitalik Buterin on L1/L2 consistency
The three L2 solution types that will rule the EVM environment in 2023 are rollups, validiums, and detached systems. Validiums employ servers or other separate systems to store the data, whereas rollups store it on L1. Validiums only accept zk-SNARKS, whereas rollups use fraud-proof or zk-SNARKs to validate the data.
https://x.com/VitalikButerin/status/1719241011476463798?s=20
Vitalk Buterin detailed this plan in his most recent blog post, which was posted today, October 31, 2023.
According to him, there are two main considerations when deciding which L2 design to build upon. Initially, there is the price of native Ethereum (ETH) data availability, followed by the requirements of the programme itself, such as its need for increased speed or improved security.
The L2 network can only read finalised blocks or revert if the Ethereum (ETH) mainnet somehow reverts (unexpectedly breaks into two different versions). These two primary models are required to maintain consistency between the L1/L2 system.
The “validating bridge,” which is a cross-blockchain mechanism that may validate its “underlying” blockchain, is another useful idea in this segment:
“Now, let’s make the bridge a validating bridge: it checks not just consensus, but also a ZK-SNARK proving that the state of any new block was computed correctly.”
But unless some “form of governance gadget on Ethereum” is able to inform the Ethereum bridge contract (ETH) that a possible hard fork is occurring, the L1/L2 equilibrium remains susceptible.
No “one-size-fits-all” solution for Ethereum L2s, here’s why
There are fees associated with each of these “add-ons” to the security and functionality of Ethereum (ETH) L2s. They may be characterised as either the security of reading Ethereum or the security of withdrawing to Ethereum in terms of security.
Each dApp must identify the ideal solution while keeping in mind its unique set of demands. High security and close connectivity are critical for some applications. Something looser is acceptable to their rivals in return for more sophisticated scaling options.
Buterin believes that, for some systems, enhancing “connectedness” gradually over the next several years may be the ideal answer.
