[draft] MIP-65: FFS: Fastconfirmation on L2 + MD-65: FFS: Fastconfirmations #65
Conversation
apenzk
changed the title
apenzk
changed the title
apenzk
changed the title
apenzk
changed the title
apenzk
changed the title
apenzk
changed the title
|
|
||
| ### D2: Decentralization of the approach | ||
|
|
||
| **User Journey**: The system is designed to be decentralized. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would suggest if we produce the certificate off-chain, as under the ZK-FFS MIP (forthcoming), we could avoid some of the complexities here. In theory, both chains could validate without necessarily knowing the other has received under an eventual consistency assumption.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this comment at the wrong desiderata? it doesnt seem to be related to decentralization but dependency of two chains.
| The design is rather similar to the Postconfirmation design. However it requests additional properties from the operator chain, see above. The sequencer chain acts as the settlement layer and we thus inherit the security properties of the operator chain for the supermajority check. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Shared sequencing and multi-chain clusters | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is obviously missing the proof of whether the Fastconfirmation implementation on the L2 can be included in the state. It's easier to suggest it should not. ZK-FFS also changes this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can be included in the state
state of who?
Summary
MD-65
MIP-65