Restaking Driven Based Rollup: Analysis of Puffer's Innovative Solution

Puffer is leveraging Restaking technology to build a more efficient Based Rollup solution, aimed at achieving decentralized ordering and facilitating inter-chain liquidity interactions. Based Rollup and mainstream Rollup will form different patterns within the Ethereum ecosystem.

Puffer's core business includes:

1. Puffer LRT: Ethereum re-staking service based on Eigenlayer.
2. Puffer UniFi: An optimization solution for Based Rollup that introduces pre-confirmation technology.
3. Puffer UniFi AVS: Build a highly synchronized application chain ecosystem using UniFi AVS to reduce liquidity fragmentation.

Based Rollup differs from mainstream Rollup solutions in terms of decentralization, efficiency, and benefit distribution to adapt to different types of application scenarios.

Basic Concepts of Rollup

Rollup is a blockchain scaling technology designed to increase transaction throughput and reduce costs. It alleviates the burden on the mainnet by processing a large number of transactions off-chain and then submitting the results to the mainnet for validation. There are mainly two types of Rollup:

1. Optimistic Rollup: Assumes all transactions are correct by default and only verifies when challenged.
2. ZK Rollup: Uses zero-knowledge proofs to ensure the legitimacy of transactions without the need for an additional challenge period.

The core idea of Rollup is "to do a lot of work off-chain and only put the results on-chain" to enhance the processing speed of the blockchain and reduce costs.

Based Rollup

The concept of Based Rollup was proposed by Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake in March 2023, mainly targeting the role of sorters between L1 and L2. Sorters are responsible for sorting and packaging transactions from L2 to L1, covering batch packaging and transaction confirmation.

Currently, most L2s adopt a centralized sequencer scheme. As the on-chain capital increases and the infrastructure matures, this will become a pressing issue to be addressed. Solutions include:

1. Decentralized sorter based on L2
2. Transfer to L1 Based Rollup

Based Rollup shifts the responsibility of transaction ordering from L2 to L1, with Ethereum L1 validator nodes acting as block proposers responsible for transaction ordering. This design makes full use of existing Ethereum node resources, avoiding the risks of centralized orderers, but also faces issues limited by the performance of the mainnet.

Puffer UniFi Optimization Plan

Puffer UniFi introduces a "pre-confirmation" mechanism to address the performance limitations of Based Rollup. Its features include:

1. Guarantee provided by Ethereum validators: Validators commit to the pending Rollup transactions before the block is packaged.
2. Penalty mechanism: If the validator fails to fulfill the pre-confirmation commitment, they will face penalties.

UniFi bypasses the issue of Based Rollup being limited by the mainnet block time through pre-confirmation, improving transaction confirmation efficiency (about 100ms).

Puffer UniFi AVS

Puffer proposed UniFi AVS as a solution based on EigenLayer, leveraging Ethereum's "Restaking" to package UniFi into AVS services. Validators on EigenLayer can participate in providing pre-confirmation services for UniFi AVS and design corresponding penalty mechanisms within AVS.

Core Values

The application chain built using UniFi AVS will become an upgrade solution for Based Rollup, with the following advantages:

1. Decentralized sorting based on L1
2. Pre-confirmation technology enhances transaction confirmation speed
3. Create Earnings for Restaking
4. Achieve Synchronous Composability

The synchronous composability feature of UniFi helps to address the issue of liquidity fragmentation. Due to L1-based decentralized ordering, different Rollups can interact within the same block without the need for cross-chain bridges, providing users with a seamless experience similar to a single chain.

Summary

Based Rollup and mainstream Rollup solutions each have their advantages, suitable for different scenarios. Based Rollup is more like the "personal guards" of the Ethereum mainnet, directly following the Ethereum system to avoid miscommunication and malicious behavior. Mainstream Rollup, on the other hand, is more like the "feudal lords," having more autonomy but requiring additional scheduling mechanisms.

The controversy between these two proposals lies in whether Rollup should return value to Ethereum or maintain autonomy. Being close to Ethereum offers higher security and natural synchronization, while autonomy can bring more benefits to operators but requires more resources to ensure decentralized security.

The inclusiveness and freedom of blockchain determine that these two solutions will coexist, reflecting the ongoing trade-offs in aspects such as decentralization, efficiency, and distribution of benefits. This exploration will continue, driving technological advancements and the evolution of developer ideologies.