1

[Question coming from reddit]

What makes the tezos rollups "enshrined" as compared to smart contract ETH rollups? Is it because the rollups have special treatment by the L1: specific sr addresses, inbox and withdrawals process etc which makes them more "efficient"? If so, what is the improvement order we are talking about in gas fee, performance etc vs a eth SC rollup?

4
  • 5
    why don't you write an answer to your own question instead of writing Q&A in the question? I think it's permitted and fine to do. Mar 27 at 22:55
  • Hi Greeneye, thanks for trying to capture this content, but as nicolas points out this format is not well suited to stackexchange For example, google will index this all as 1 big question with no answer. I'd encourage you to delete these and repost the specific questions, then either ask the relevant people to provide their answers here again as actual answers, or post 1 answer for each yourself, quoting the person. It would be better to get the original authors to do it though, so if anyone has any follow on questions, they can leave a comment on that specific answer
    – Simon McLoughlin
    Mar 28 at 14:05
  • Just as example Greeneye, do it this way: tezos.stackexchange.com/questions/4422/… Post the question. Then post the answer seperate like in the example. Thank you!
    – user9011
    Mar 28 at 17:22
  • Moved them all, great catch for the google indexing!
    – greeneye12
    Mar 28 at 21:55

1 Answer 1

2

Response from whalesniper

ETH rollups are built into specific contracts. So imagine I deploy my own KT1 which has a multisig and a bunch of rollup commitment logic or whatever. This rollup is built on Ethereum smart contracts but the base Layer 1 blockchain is only running a solidity contract, and makes no guarantees about the sequencing or settlement of the rollup data.

So yes, Tezos rollups get special treatment by the L1 which gives better security guarantees. You'll see arthur talk cryptically about other rollups being "multisigs", meaning they arent guaranteed by the ETH L1, but a consortium of private keys held off-chain.

I think one would be able to implement similar use-cases in both enshrined & non-enshrined styles, but I think one key is that ETH core rollup tech will always be limited by the Solidity language. Tezos rollups are built to support any number of languages, and either way the Tezos L1 can simply upgrade to integrate anything else we need.

Response from Daniel Hines

"Enshrined" means that rollups have a first-class representation in the protocol - the protocol itself receives messages intended for L2, processes state commitments from rollup nodes, and arbitrates challenges to state commitments via refutations games. This has many interesting advantages, and IMO is a prime example of Tezos value-prop as a self-ammending protocol. I'll outline some that come to mind:

Security: Designing a secure rollup bridge is difficult. Designing one in the challenging of setting of a smart contract execution environment is even more difficult. Native code is much easier to write, reason about, test, benchmark, etc.

Performance: By running the refutation game in native code as opposed to an interpreted smart contract language, we can afford rollups more compute per operation (and lower fees).

Governance: Highly related to security, the semantics of rollups (at least on L1) are governed by the usual Tezos governance process, which, over 5 years and 12 upgrades, has a pretty good track record. Note, this doesn't account for upgrades to the rollup kernel itself, the governance of which is determined by the kernel implementation, much like a smart contract (more details further down).

Human resource efficiency: SORU is a cross-team project, with deep support from Nomadic Labs, Trili Tech, and Marigold (and maybe others?). Dozens of engineers are working on the infrastructure. Different engineers bring different emphases (security, performance, UX, etc.). The result is that code velocity is very high right now. Because the L1 infrastructure is enshrined, every rollup will benefit simultaneously as upgrades are pushed via the usual amendment process and Octez release cycles.

UX: Because they are first-class, we can tailor the protocol for a better UX, and toolmakers (indexers, wallets, SDK's like Taquito, etc.) have a stronger common denominator to target. As @whalesniper mentioned, tickets will go along way toward rollup interop, and I think this will be a big deal for both UX and security.

Response from nomadic lab

Indeed, having smart rollup infrastructure directly implemented as a protocol component makes the system more efficient, opening more possibilities for sophisticated mechanisms. For example, we were able to implement a shared inbox between all rollups running on top of Tezos paving the way for a form of broadcasting of messages targeting several rollups at once.

See this blog post for more details.

1
  • It would be better if we could get these people to post their answers here. For example, If I wanted to ask a follow on question to Daniels answer, my only recourse is to leave a comment to you, hoping you will ask Daniel for me. While its great to have this content here, its not an ideal approach
    – Simon McLoughlin
    Mar 29 at 9:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.