Enshrined rollups: pros and cons of rollups built into L1 consensus
Quote398 words
Defines enshrined rollups (native to L1 consensus with an immutably hard-wired bridge) and weighs benefits (scalability, inherited security, L1 decentralization, immutability, interoperability) against complexity, L1 dependency and upgradeability limits.
Key claims
Enshrined rollups avoid multisig upgrade-key risk since the L1 governs them
Complexity may hinder adoption
Dymension targets enshrined app-specific rollApps
Enshrined rollups are rollups that are natively built into L1 consensus. Their bridge is immutably hard-wired into the bridge. 🔒🚀
Let's explore the pros and cons of this! ⚖️
Being enshrined comes with some interesting benefits to both the L1 and the rollup! 👀👇
🟢 Scalability: Enshrined rollups increase the tx throughput by performing most of the computational work off-chain and only posting the resulting state to the blockchain.
🟢 Security: Being integrated into L1 consensus, enshrined rollups inherit the security properties of the L1.
🟢 L1 Decentralization: As enshrined rollups take computational load off-chain, they enable scalability without an impairment on decentralization through increased resource requirements for running a node.
🟢 Immutability: Most smart contract based rollups have a multisig governing the rollup contract and fast upgrade keys to swiftly introduce bug fixes and updates. This could allow for malicious upgrades to the rollup system. Enshrined rollups are governed by the L1, so the centralization risk is mitigated here.
🟢 Interoperability: Enshrined rollups can be designed to be compatible with the L1 and other enshrined rollups on the same L1 base layer, which facilitates interaction between rollups & applications built on the same infra.
They do also have some cons though:
🔴 Complexity: Enshrined rollups add a layer of complexity to the L1. Depending on the base layer they can be hard implement, potentially slowing down adoption.
🔴 Dependency on L1: The operation and security of enshrined rollups are dependent on the L1. If the L1 is compromised, the enshrined rollup could also be affected.
🔴 Upgradeability: Enshrined rollups may be less flexible and harder to upgrade than other types of rollups because their logic is embedded in the L1.
Overall, enshrined rollups are definitely a novel approach to building rollups that is worth keeping an eye on. The benefits arising from security, scalability & interoperability are not to be underestimated. However it remains to be seen if complexity will turn out to be an obstacle on the path to adoption.
Personally, I'm excited about the future of enshrined rollups! 🌟
What about you? Let me know in the comments! 💬
Make sure to follow me @zerokn0wledge_ and @RedactedRes to stay ahead on the curve on rollup-based scaling & emerging L2 ecosystems! 🀄️
One example of a blockchain focused on enabling you to build enshrined app-specific rollups (a.k.a. rollApps) is @dymension. Make sure to check them out!
QUOTING @a1research__
Thanks for the comment ser! Interesting point! We think enshrined rollups would likely best be classified as a separate category on the level of "smart contract rollup" & "sovereign rollup" on the above visualization. They are integrated with the consensus mechanism of the L1 an
Thanks for the comment ser! Interesting point! We think enshrined rollups would likely best be classified as a separate category on the level of "smart contract rollup" & "sovereign rollup" on the above visualization. They are integrated with the consensus mechanism of the L1 an
What came next · since 25 Oct 2023
Since then
Zero has written 1 more piece on Dymension since this one.