2024-06-13 14:46:39 +02:00
|
|
|
Ethereum L2 Rollups
|
|
|
|
|
===================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A quick and dirty overview of existing rollups and their suitability for hosting
|
|
|
|
|
the Codex marketplace smart contracts. To interact with these contracts, the
|
|
|
|
|
participants in the network create blockchain transactions for purchasing and
|
|
|
|
|
selling storage, and for providing storage proofs that are then checked
|
|
|
|
|
on-chain. It would be too costly for these transactions to happen on Ethereum
|
|
|
|
|
main net, which is why this document explores L2 rollups as an alternative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main sources used:
|
|
|
|
|
- individual websites of the rollup projects
|
|
|
|
|
- https://l2beat.com
|
|
|
|
|
- https://blog.kroma.network/l2-scaling-landscape-fees-and-max-tps-fe6087d3f690
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Requirements
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the storage marketplace to work, we have the following requirements for a
|
|
|
|
|
rollup:
|
|
|
|
|
1. Low gas costs; if gas is too costly then the business case of storage
|
|
|
|
|
providers disappears
|
|
|
|
|
2. EVM compatibility; this shortens our time to market because we already have
|
|
|
|
|
Solidity contracts
|
|
|
|
|
3. Support for BN254 elliptic curve precompiles (ecAdd, ecMul, ecPairing) for
|
|
|
|
|
the proof system
|
|
|
|
|
4. High throughput; our current proof system that checks all proofs separately
|
|
|
|
|
on chain requires a large number of transactions per second
|
|
|
|
|
5. Censorship resistant; an L2 operator should not have the power to exclude
|
|
|
|
|
transactions from certain people or apps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note that low latency is not a requirement; it's ok to have latency equivalent
|
|
|
|
|
to L1, which is in the order of tens of seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main flavours
|
|
|
|
|
-------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although there are many L2 rollups, there is a limited number of technical
|
|
|
|
|
stacks that underly them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is the family of purely optimistic rollups, that rely on fraud proofs to
|
|
|
|
|
ensure that they are kept honest:
|
|
|
|
|
- Arbitrum
|
|
|
|
|
- Optimism / OP Stack
|
|
|
|
|
- Fuel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And there are the rollups that rely on zero-knowledge proofs to prove that they
|
|
|
|
|
act honestly:
|
|
|
|
|
- Polygon zkEVM / CDK
|
|
|
|
|
- Linea
|
|
|
|
|
- zkSync
|
|
|
|
|
- Scroll
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And there's Taiko, which uses a combination of zero-knowledge proofs and fraud
|
|
|
|
|
proofs to keep the network honest:
|
|
|
|
|
- Taiko
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-09-30 12:18:11 +02:00
|
|
|
Gas prices
|
|
|
|
|
----------
|
2024-06-13 14:46:39 +02:00
|
|
|
|
2024-09-30 12:18:11 +02:00
|
|
|
A rough approximation of average gas prices for submitting a Codex storage proof
|
2024-06-13 14:46:39 +02:00
|
|
|
for each rollup:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-09-30 12:18:11 +02:00
|
|
|
| Rollup | Average proof price | Potential profit |
|
2024-06-13 14:46:39 +02:00
|
|
|
| ------------------- | ------------------ | ---------------- |
|
2024-09-30 12:18:11 +02:00
|
|
|
| Mantle | $0.0000062723 | $2.58 |
|
2024-06-13 14:46:39 +02:00
|
|
|
| Boba network | $0.0016726250 | -$2.54 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Immutable zkEVM | $0.0073595500 | -$20.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Arbitrum | $0.0083631250 | -$23.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
| zkSync Era | $0.0209078125 | -$61.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Base | $0.0418156250 | -$125.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Optimism | $0.0836312500 | -$254.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Polygon zkEVM | $0.1254468750 | -$382.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Blast | $0.1672625000 | -$511.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Scroll | $0.2090781250 | -$639.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Taiko | $0.2508937500 | -$768.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metis | $0.4014300000 | -$1,230.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Linea | $0.8363125000 | -$2,566.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This table was created by eyeballing the gas cost and token price graphs for
|
|
|
|
|
each L2, and [calculating the USD costs](rollups.ods) for a proof from that. We
|
|
|
|
|
did not include rollups that are not EVM compatible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential profit (per month per TB) is calculated by assuming operational costs
|
|
|
|
|
of $1.40 and revenue of $4.00 per TB per month, an average slot size of 10 GB,
|
|
|
|
|
and an average of 1 proof per slot per day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EVM compatibility
|
|
|
|
|
-----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This shows which rollups are EVM compatible, and whether they support the BN254
|
|
|
|
|
elliptic curve precompiles that we require for verification of our storage
|
|
|
|
|
proofs (ecAdd, ecMul, ecPairing).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Rollup | EVM compatible | Elliptic Curve operations |
|
|
|
|
|
| --------------------- | -------------- | ------------------------- |
|
|
|
|
|
| Arbitrum | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Base | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Blast | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Boba network | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Immutable zkEVM | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Linea | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Mantle | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metis | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Optimism | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Polygon zkEVM | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Scroll | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Taiko | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| zkSync Era | Yes | No |
|
|
|
|
|
| Fuel L2 V1 | No | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Fuel Rollup OS | No | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Immutable X | No | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Polygon Miden | No | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Starknet | No | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| zkSync lite | No | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throughput
|
|
|
|
|
----------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A rough approximation of the maximum number of transactions that a rollup can
|
|
|
|
|
handle, and the maximum size of the storage network that it might support:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Rollup | Maximum TPS | Maximum storage |
|
|
|
|
|
| --------------------- | ----------- | --------------- |
|
|
|
|
|
| zkSync Era | 750 | 1236 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Starknet | 484 | 798 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Optimism | 455 | 750 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Base | 455 | 733 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Mantle | 400 | 659 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metis | 357 | 588 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Polygon zkEVM | 237 | 391 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Arbitrum | 226 | 372 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Boba network | 205 | 338 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Scroll | 50 | 82 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Taiko | 33 | 54 PB |
|
|
|
|
|
| Blast | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Immutable zkEVM | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Linea | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Fuel L2 V1 | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Fuel Rollup OS | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Immutable X | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Polygon Miden | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
| zkSync lite | ? | ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum size of the storage network is [calculated](rollups.ods) assuming an
|
|
|
|
|
average 1 proof per 24 hours per slot, average slot size 10 GB, and average
|
|
|
|
|
erasure coding rate of 1/2. In practice the calculated maximum storage is going
|
|
|
|
|
to be less, because we can't use up the entirety of the rollup capacity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum TPS figures are taken from an [overview document by
|
|
|
|
|
Kroma](https://blog.kroma.network/l2-scaling-landscape-fees-and-max-tps-fe6087d3f690)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Censorship resistance
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Censorship resistance can be achieved by having a decentralized architecture,
|
|
|
|
|
where anyone is allowed to propose blocks and there are are no admin rights that
|
|
|
|
|
allow a rollup operator to change the rules in their favour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Only Fuel L2 V1 has all these properties, the others don't. And because Fuel L2
|
|
|
|
|
V1 is a payment network without smart contracts it is not suitable for the Codex
|
|
|
|
|
marketplace. This means that at this moment there is no censorship resistant
|
|
|
|
|
rollup that can host the Codex marketplace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taiko is one of the few rollups that has a decentralized architecture, and it's
|
|
|
|
|
committed to becoming permissionless. However, at the moment it is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Rollup | Decentralized | Permissionless | Adminless |
|
|
|
|
|
| --------------------- | ------------- | --------------- | ------------ |
|
|
|
|
|
| Fuel L2 V1 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| Metis | Yes | No | No |
|
|
|
|
|
| Taiko | Yes | No | No |
|
|
|
|
|
| Arbitrum | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Base | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Blast | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Boba network | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Fuel Rollup OS | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Immutable X | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Immutable zkEVM | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Linea | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Mantle | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Optimism | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Polygon zkEVM | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Polygon Miden | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Scroll | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| Starknet | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| zkSync lite | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
| zkSync Era | No | N/A | N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conclusion
|
|
|
|
|
----------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There seems to be no rollup that matches all the requirements that we listed in
|
|
|
|
|
the beginning of the document. The most pressing problem is that only Mantle
|
|
|
|
|
seems to be cheap enough to allow storage providers to turn a profit, given the
|
|
|
|
|
assumptions of an average 10 GB slot size and 1 proof per 24 hours. It is
|
|
|
|
|
unclear whether these low prices are sustainable in the long run. If we want to
|
|
|
|
|
have more choice on where to deploy, then we either need to reduce the number of
|
|
|
|
|
on-chain proofs in Codex drastically, or we need to find a way to reduce rollup
|
|
|
|
|
transaction costs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Luckily we're already working on reducing the number of proofs by introducing
|
|
|
|
|
proof aggregation, but the analysis in this document shows that we might not be
|
|
|
|
|
able to launch a storage network without it. Reducing the number of proofs also
|
|
|
|
|
ensures that the network can grow to a larger total size.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When we look at reducing the transaction costs, then the best thing to focus on
|
|
|
|
|
is getting rid of the need to post transactions on L1 in blobs. This is by far
|
|
|
|
|
the most expensive part of running a rollup, and this is most likely also why
|
|
|
|
|
Mantle is the only rollup in this overview that is cheap enough; it uses EigenDA
|
|
|
|
|
instead of posting to L1. In this respect, it might also be interesting to look
|
|
|
|
|
at Arbitrum AnyTrust, which has a similar design. We could also consider
|
|
|
|
|
creating a fork of an existing rollup and use Codex as the DA layer. Some of the
|
|
|
|
|
new modular architectures for creating rollups, such as
|
|
|
|
|
[Espresso](https://www.espressosys.com/), [Astria](https://www.astria.org/),
|
|
|
|
|
[Radius](https://www.theradius.xyz/), [Altlayer](https://www.altlayer.io/) and
|
|
|
|
|
[NodeKit](https://www.nodekit.xyz/) could also make it easier to experiment with
|
|
|
|
|
different rollup designs.
|
