Editor's Note: This article comes fromChain News ChainNews (ID: chainnewscom), Author: Pan Zhixiong, published with authorization.

Editor's Note: This article comes from

Chain News ChainNews (ID: chainnewscom)

, Author: Pan Zhixiong, published with authorization.

Ethereum Layer 2 is about to enter a new stage this month. The Optimism network based on Rollup technology will be officially launched on the main network, and Offchain Labs' Arbitrum solution will be launched as soon as this month or next month.

Layer 2 is a hot topic in the Ethereum community, but there are also many "unsolved mysteries". In fact, there are already potential solutions to many questions and problems about Layer 2. Of course, there are some questions for which there are no clear answers.

Based on our observations and public discussions on Layer 2 in the community, Lianwen compiled a list of common Layer 2 problems and potential solutions:

Layer 2 has a worse user experience?

This possibility does exist. After all, the wallets, applications, and supporting tools of the early Layer 2 network are very imperfect, just like the early Ethereum network. Especially understanding and learning Layer 2 (two-layer network) conceptually increases the cognitive load.

Fortunately, this problem can be gradually solved with the popularization of the second-tier network and the improvement of facilities. And in the long run, the two-layer network can increase the user experience. For example, when the user enters the Ethereum ecosystem, the wallet can help the user solve the problem of multiple Layer 2 accounts, and the transaction speed will be faster in the Layer 2 network. Transaction fees are also lower.

Therefore, from the perspective of wallets and applications, the best strategy may be that users do not need to perceive what Layer 2 is. After all, this is a technical term that most end users should not learn and understand.

secondary title

It takes a week for assets to exit from Layer 2 to Layer 1?

This may also become one of the biggest doubts that prevent users from entering these Layer 2 networks. If users need to quickly withdraw to Layer 1 or other Layer 2 networks, they must provide users with some solutions that can quickly exit Layer 2.

Reference link:However, if the future is a multi-Layer 2 network pattern, users will have more cross-Layer 2 needs. At this time, it is definitely unacceptable for users to wait for 7 days.

So there are already some projects that provide cross-Layer 2 network capital bridges. Users' assets can be instantly cross-chained from one Layer 2 network to another Layer 2 network, and at the same time need to pay some fees. After all, it saves 7 days of capital use costs. Specifically, for example, Maker is providing a DAI capital bridge, and Connext, Celer's cBridge, DeGate, and Hop Protocol are all trying to provide such a general solution.

Reference link:

"Avoiding the Rollup battlefield, Connext chooses to use the state channel to open up the Layer 2 "island""

Do (DeFi) applications need to develop Layer 2-specific versions? Are migration costs high?

Reference link:Even for Layer 2 networks that directly support EVM, developers need to deploy a Layer 2 version that is independent of the Layer 1 version.

However, there are also some Layer 2 solutions that take into account the difficulty of developer migration, so they invented the concept of "in-place expansion". Layer 1 applications can also be used by Layer 2 networks without additional adjustments. In this scenario, Layer 2 is more like the command layer of funds, which is specially used to realize the deployment of funds. The teams contributing in this field are mainly Celer's Layer2.Finance and StarkWare's DeFi Pooling solution.

Reference link:

secondary title

Will there be only one Layer 2 in the end?

Many people think that in the end Layer 2 may also present a monopoly pattern, so application developers are considering which Layer 2 network to choose for research and development. After all, applications in the same Layer 2 network have better composability.

However, considering the differences between different Layer 2 technologies, such as security, expansion efficiency and other factors, it is likely that there will not be only one final oligarch. For example, for Rollup, an increase of two orders of magnitude is already very good, but if you want to carry higher-performance and lower-cost transactions, Plasma technology may be more suitable, such as the ecology of NFT games built by Polygon (Matic) , it can be independent of the Rollup ecology.

secondary title

When comparing ZK Rollup and Optimistic Rollup, many people think that ZK Rollup may be the final form of Rollup expansion technology because it is safer.

However, considering that the mainnet launches of ZK Rollup, Matter Labs and StarkWare have not yet been confirmed, it is conservatively estimated that their mainnets may be launched by the end of the year or next year. The gap of this year is enough for other projects to build application ecology or even build ecological barriers on Optimistic Rollup or Plasma solutions.

In addition, ZK Rollup still has a lot of room for optimization in terms of performance. Zero-knowledge proof calculations require a huge amount of computer computing power. With the improvement of FPGA solutions or general-purpose CPU capabilities, the performance will gradually improve.

Of course, there is another possibility that Optimistic Rollup can provide the most direct expansion effect for expansion this year or in the past two years, and they can also cooperate or merge with the ZK Rollup solution in the future to achieve expansion in a safer way.

secondary title

Are the applications within Layer 2 composable?

Of course, not all applications have composability requirements. For example, most DeFi applications and NFTs do not need to be combined.

Is there any composability between applications of different Layer 2?

Applications between different Layer 2s are not composable, at least some current Layer 2 solutions have not considered the ability to call applications across networks.

However, if there is a need for cross-Layer 2 asset migration, some teams are already implementing it, such as Connext, Celer's cBridge, DeGate, Hop Protocol, etc.

secondary title

There are also some special nodes in the Layer 2 network to help maintain the operation and security of the network. These nodes may need to regularly publish layer 2 data to the first layer, may need to monitor all Layer 2 data to prevent someone from cheating, or may need to provide computing power for zero-knowledge proofs, etc.

Reference link:In fact, some teams have proposed a relatively simple consensus, such as the Proof of Donation proposed by Hermez. All nodes obtain the packaging right through bidding. get income.

In the long run, Layer 2 networks should implement their own set of consensus schemes to satisfy the characteristics of decentralization and permissionlessness.

Reference link:

"A Quick Look at Hermez, Ethereum's ZK Rollup Expansion Solution, Will Focus on High-Frequency Transfer Scenarios"

Will Layer 2 networks issue tokens?

Reference link:At present, many networks of the Rollup scheme have not indicated whether they will issue tokens, but the possibility of issuing tokens is not low.

For example, the way Hermez achieves consensus is through the protocol token HEZ, and Matter Labs has also publicly stated that it will issue tokens for the zkSync network. There are also several Layer 2 solutions that have issued tokens before, such as Loopring, Celer, Polygon (Matic), etc.

Reference link:

"Matter Labs to Launch Native Token for zkSync to Enable Consensus and Faster Transaction Confirmation"

secondary title

Reference link:Can private transactions or asset anonymization be achieved at Layer 2?

Some teams are adding private transaction functions to Ethereum through an independent Layer 2 network to enhance the effect of asset anonymization for users, similar to the currency mixing tool Tornado.Cash.

Reference link:

"Ethereum Privacy Technology Solution Aztec Launches Aztec 2.0 Rollup, ETH Privacy Rollup Service Has Been Enabled"

Although the "ZK" of the two-layer expansion plan ZK Rollup refers to zero-knowledge proof, this ZK is not used for private transactions, but uses the "succinctness" (succinctness) in zk-SNARKs technology to improve scalability. So Aztec named their technology ZK² Rollup or ZK ZK Rollup, and added a zero-knowledge proof for privacy to ZK Rollup.

Considering that Tornado.Cash, the most important anonymous product in the Ethereum community, consumes a lot of Gas, a privacy operation on 1 ETH may consume at least an additional 20% of Gas (a conservative estimate), which largely hinders the development of the project. Adoption. So, maybe Tornado.Cash will finally consider a Layer 2 solution as well.

Can front-running or MEV be avoided on Layer 2?

Reference link:Some Layer 2 protocols (such as Offchain Labs, Optimism, and Matter Labs) have begun to conduct research and launch solutions on this topic, but it should take some time before the final launch.

Since the generalization and complexity of DeFi applications on the Ethereum Layer 1 main network, the value ingestion behavior for transaction ordering has gradually increased. Usually, this type of behavior can be called front-running or MEV (Maximal Extractable Value).