Variable sharding of secure data

The beautiful idea of Danksharding is this: only the builder (which is an honest minority assumption anyway) will need to run expensive hardware. Over time, rollups scale to millions of TPS, with very small costs for validators, users, and everyone else. But the problem is that this ambitious vision will take time to verify. It could be between 2 and 5 years, of course it also depends on who I ask. While the crypto space has been suffering from extreme planning fallacies, things are certainly improving, but I also refuse to trust any roadmap until I can see a fully functional prototype.

EIP-4844 is a huge step forward and I believe it will be more than enough for all applications and valuable transactions that require high security for the foreseeable future, and will allow rollups to expand by 100 times ~ 1000 times from current activities. However, there will be different categories of data-hungry applications that may require “millions of TPS” without requiring high security.

At the same time, it’s clear that developers aren’t going to wait for full danksharding. Today, 7 of L2Beat’s first 15 projects are not rollups, but validiums and optimistic chains that use external data availability layers. (Here, I’m assuming you’re familiar with these structures and know why they’re still superior to sidechains, etc.) StarkEx (now there are 6 validiums!) ), Arbitrum and Metis already have external data availability layers; StarkNet, zkSync, Polygon and others are building internal data availability layers, not to mention the likes of EigenDA or Celestia. These hybrid solutions require neither EIP-4844 nor full danksharding to keep transaction fees low, and most critically, they are already here.

One way is to let them do their thing, and users will choose the less secure validium option (but still higher than alt-L1s) when they need it. The magic of Volitions is that users can choose on a per-transaction or per-user basis.

But another approach: How can we improve on an external data availability layer?

While this is far from a representative sample, today 20% of Ethereum validators are above the norm. At the same time, 45% prefer to have very conservative bandwidth/traffic requirements. With EIP-4844, we are optimizing for that 45%, but the remaining 55% will continue to run underutilized bandwidth. So, the idea is about taking advantage of this idle bandwidth by adding simple data sharding, where the set of validators will be split. I don’t know anything about engineering, but I believe Dankrad, it’s “trivial”.

With EIP-4844, we have a new layer of data availability. I call it data shard number 0 (DS0). DS0 is mandatory and is guaranteed by a full set of Ethereum validators.

Here we can have more data shards (S1, DS2…). etc.), these shards can be opted in from validators. Therefore, 30% of the above 2TB~10TB camp can run 2 or 3 data shards. So, while DS0 is guaranteed by a 100% set of Ethereum validators, DS1 is 55%, DS2 is 50%, and so on. Now that we have over-spec verifiers who are comfortable with more than 20TB of traffic or more than 100Mbps of bandwidth (who obviously mistake themselves for Solana verifiers) are running, that 20% are also able to run more data shards. So, your last data shard (DS16) only provides 10% Ethereum security. Of course, I make it sound casual, but depending on the structure of the Beacon Chain Committee, there may be some clear divisions. But the gist is that DS0 comes with 100% security (so all rollups will be HRE). DS1 has 50% security, DS10 has 25% security, DS16 has 10% security, and so on, for a new build type, it is somewhere between the full rollup (DS0/100% security) and the validium/optimistic chain.

In reality, as we can see, many validiums and data layers are coming online, and the security required for each application, user, and use case is a scope. Not everything needs to be secured by hundreds of billions of dollars of economic security.

But the problem is that if we assume that 30% of ETH supply is staked, even the “minimum security” DS16, even in this bear market, still has $5 billion in economic security backing, and this is still the top alt-L1 level of security range. It’s also important to remember that this security scope is only for the availability of data. Proof of validity and proof of fraud are still verified with 100% security! Therefore, even a DS16’s half-rollup/half-validium has significantly higher security performance than the top-of-the-line alt-L1.

This may still be a significant improvement over the external data tier option. To be sure, high-value financial transactions will choose to settle on DS0, but some mid-value NFTs may only need DS8, and even DS16 may be redundant for zero-value gaming applications. As mentioned above, in a voluntary type setting, each app can choose the level of security it needs based on its own situation.

What about rollup users? They only need to run the data shards that are relevant to them, so the system requirements are no different from EIP-4844. That’s why, even if there is a compromise on security, there is no decentralized compromise relative to EIP-4844. (Unless it’s a gigarollup settled on multiple data shards — but that’s something its users will be well aware of)

To be clear, I don’t expect these things to happen, these are just the whips of a crazy non-technical amateur blogger. The path to least resistance is to arrive at EIP-4844 in 2023, and once it saturates within a few years, data-hungry use cases will spread to many external data layers, and data will all be highly commoditized and rich. Eventually, over the years, danksharding came online as the best solution. But maybe someone will read this and find a better idea to fill the huge gap between 4844 and full sharding…

Posted by:CoinYuppie,Reprinted with attribution to:
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.

Like (0)
Donate Buy me a coffee Buy me a coffee
Previous 2022-11-04 22:53
Next 2022-11-05 09:45

Related articles