What core issue is L2 solving with the cheaper Ethereum Gas fees?

Author: Todd Source: X, @0x_Todd

Looking at the current results, with the gas fees on the Ethereum L1 mainnet dropping to the lowest level in 5 years, many projects now feel that deploying on L1 may not be out of the question. So many people will ask, what core issues are the current L2 solutions addressing?

There is an old topic called the impossible triangle of blockchain. According to Vitalik's explanation, only two of the three can be chosen: [security], [decentralization], and [scalability].

Returning to the essence of technology, this is the problem that L2 should solve:

First, the status summary is placed on L1 and maintained by the mainnet for 【security】.

Second, try to maintain [decentralization] in the efforts on the sorter.

Finally, the [scalability] is implemented as cleverly as possible off-chain by L2.

Different L2 solutions have their own strengths and weaknesses, and everyone is familiar with OP Rollup and ZK Rollup. Today, I want to talk about something different, such as Based-Rollup.

The Based L2 solution was also first proposed by Vitalik Buterin, and L2 projects like Taiko have been promoting the Based Rollup concept.

PS: Note that it is Based, which has nothing to do with Coinbase's Base; Base is also OP system-related.

As we all know, in a standard OP system L2, the sequencer holds significant power, as it can decide whose transactions come first and whose come later. Even without malicious intent, it can still profit through MEV. This is why, for example, Metis proposes to implement decentralized sequencers.

Different L2s handle MEV differently: for example, Arb advocates for fair treatment of MEV (strictly first-come, first-served), while OP is more encouraging, believing that MEV is a free market behavior, thus taxing MEV. However, regardless of the approach, L2 sequencers hold a prominent position.

Thus, Based-Rollup chooses to take aim at the sequencer—its concept is to let ETH L1 handle the sorting directly, thereby limiting the power of the L2 sequencer.

Referencing an image from @taikoxyz's document:

You can see that it is a three-step process:

In the first step, the L2 seeker packages the L2 transactions and sends them to the L2 block builder.

Step 2, the L2 block Builder constructs the block;

In the third step, L1 seekers will include the L2 block in the blocks they build on L1.

The L1 seeker and L2 builder here can be the same person.

This is another clever idea of "working two jobs". In fact, the device performance of L1 searchers has redundancy, and doing an additional block construction for Taiko L2 puts no pressure at all.

To use an inappropriate metaphor, if we compare ETH and L2 to the relationship between a province and a city, then the idea of Based Rollup is: to have the mayor (L2 builder) also serve as the deputy provincial governor (L1 searcher), which actually utilizes L1 resources to ensure the security of L2.

Taiko has been a whole year from TGE until now, and the Token Unlock is about to start, so Taiko has also been brewing a new idea over the past year, called Based Booster Rollup/BBR.

Booster Rollup can also serve as a mirror for L1, which is quite an interesting concept. However, due to space constraints, the analysis of Booster Rollup will be discussed in the next article.