- Polygon Labs is doubling down on layer 3 chain criticism.
- The company claims that Layer 3 chains can achieve all the benefits that Layer 2 seeks to achieve without the drawbacks.
- The company also claims that the only real benefit of a layer 3 chain lies in its upper layer 2.
As the Ethereum roadmap becomes increasingly rollup-centric, the emergence of layer 3 chains, a new type of rollup that uses layer 2 chains as payment layers instead of layer 1 chains, has sparked controversy.
In recent months, this debate has seen contributions from several sectors of the cryptocurrency industry, including Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin and Polygon (MATIC) Labs CEO Marc Boiron.
In a recent blog post, Polygon (MATIC) Labs reiterated its CEO’s views, arguing that these new types of rollups are largely useless.
Is it just a gimmick?
“L3 means nothing.” In a clip shared by the official Polygon AggLayer.
In a blog post, Polygon Labs argued that in reality, Layer 3 networks don’t actually have any new scaling benefits and only replicate the current fragmentation issues faced by Layer 2 chains.
According to the company, the only real benefit of a Layer 3 chain comes from Layer 2 at the user’s expense.
Polygon (MATIC) Labs Busts the Layer 3 Myth: Is Aggregation the Answer?
As Polygon Labs highlights, arguments for Layer 3 typically include greater customizability, lower costs, better interoperability, and easier onboarding. However, according to the company, all of these expected benefits can be achieved through Layer 2 leveraging the tools provided by the Polygon stack.
Polygon Labs argues that the claim that layer 3 chains are easier to customize than layer 2 chains is false. The company specifically claimed that Layer 2, built with the company’s CDK, can be customized in any way without the downside of losing sovereignty like a Layer 3 chain and is subject to the Layer 2 chain.
This sovereignty claim would again support the company’s claim that layer 3 chains offer greater cost advantages over layer 2 chains. Polygon Labs argues that while Layer 3 chains may end up receiving “extraction fees” from their parent Layer 2 chains, a zero-knowledge-based Layer 2 chain connected to Polygon’s AggLayer could further reduce the fees by aggregating evidence.
Polygon Labs argued that better interoperability comes at a higher cost to developers and users due to the aforementioned extraction costs. Once again, the company notes that this is another problem solved by AggLayer, an interoperability solution that promises near-instantaneous, atomic transactions.
Finally, to make onboarding with centralized exchanges easier, Polygon Labs emphasized that in this case the layer 3 chain relies on the layer 2 chain to connect to as many exchanges as possible. In contrast, AggLayer connected chains allow new layer 2 chains to onboard users from other exchanges connected to layer 2.
Polygon Labs also argues that in addition to failing to deliver on its promises, Layer 3 chains also face shortcomings such as reliance on Layer 2 instead of Ethereum for security, lack of sovereignty and governance, and continued fragmentation beyond connectivity to a single Layer 2 ecosystem. I did.
According to the company, it only advocated for Layer 3 because Layer 2 increased block space demand and was being built outside of ZK technology.
On the flipside
- Ethereum’s Vitalik Buterin claimed Layer 3 chains are not suitable as a scaling solution, but can be used for other purposes such as a data availability layer.
- Projects advocating layer 3 chains are competitors to Polygon Labs.
Why This Matters
Layer 3 chains are one of the most recent trends in the Ethereum space. A recent debate about this may help users better understand how it works.
For more information on the Ethereum Layer 3 discussion, read:
Vitalik Buterin dispels the Layer 3 hype: ‘It’s not a magic scaling fix’
Stay updated on the Tigran Gambaryan detention story:
Binance Executive Taken to Court Over Nigeria Ordeal