Proof of Efficiency: A new consensus mechanism for zk-rollups

[tudor-malene]

Thanks David,
it makes sense.

@davidsrz

The protocol does not limit that, but it’s not the main approach. In our vision, a sequencer could be a wallet app, an exchange or a game for example… in general, applications that have a use case or transactions brokers.

I have a feeling the “Sequencer per app” approach without any coordination is quite vulnerable to someone submitting “double-spend” transactions to different sequencers, thus making them waste gas.
I struggled with these questions myself when working on the design of the POBI protocol. In my experience, it’s not an easy task to come up with a coordination mechanism that doesn’t transform the rollups into a sidechain.

@davidsrz

It’s kind of a reverse auction where each permissionless Aggregator decides when it’s profitable to trigger the calculation of a proof according to the available incentives in the zk-rollup smart contract.

My feeling here is that profitability will be the same for everyone, given the same inputs ( ethereum gas price, accumulated fees, etc). Is there another factor that might add some randomness?

@davidsrz

Aggregators are permissionless participants and the only thing that they can do is run the enforced ZKP calculation. If they want to get valid proofs, they need to meet all the requirements including fees distribution (or the actions that have been encoded as required).

Does this mean there is some more logic on the ethereum smart contract level besides the zkp verification logic?

Hope this is helpful.