The best difference that can be made is to return the gas to the user, with this the network will always remain dynamic, lowering the gas will not help the network, the difference will be having a progress machine.
2 Likes
This could be game-changing if we do this right. Upwards from here 
1 Like
need matic for gas fee on zkevm
2 Likes
You state “Changes to the checkpoint logic of the bridge smart contract are required to include zkEVM proof verification as a condition.”
Therefore it appears that if a user has deployed a custom bridge contract (PoS) which inherits contracts from Polygon’s fx-portal (link) then that custom bridge would need to be updated to reflect the new dependency - please confirm
It would be great to get some more information about the proposed changes to fx-portal / other associated repositories to understand implications for users’ smart contract upgrades
2 Likes
As a leading validator on the network, we believe this upgrade is a significant step towards Polygon’s vision of becoming the value layer of the internet and are truly excited about the possibilities this upgrade brings to the Polygon ecosystem.
At Luganodes, we’re committed to supporting Polygon’s growth and the adoption of scalable and secure solutions and would love if the team can address a few concerns that the community has:
•MATIC Token Utility: The community is interested in understanding the increased/decreased utility of the MATIC token as a result of the proposal. This includes questions about the future of MATIC utility, such as freezing the token supply, staking fees, and whether they will be paid in ETH. It would be beneficial for the proposal to address these concerns and outline the future plans for the MATIC token.
•Technology: Regarding the technology aspect, will the new approach remove bor and heimdall completely or add logic to them. It’s important to clarify how the new proposal impacts the existing infrastructure. Preserving past data and ensuring smooth transition mechanisms should be part of the proposal.
•Staking: Understanding how staking rewards will work in the future, whether they will still be based on checkpoints, and the evolving percentage of rewards are important considerations. The proposal should provide insights into the staking mechanism and how it will function in the upgraded version.
7 Likes
Agree with you on this one as the Matic utility is definitely undergoing a change based on the PiP. The team is planning to issue a Matic Token Blog post somewhere around July 1st I believe.
5 Likes
We are very excited for this upgrade.
As Alex said, can’t wait to go deep into this code and architecture stack.
Folks have covered most questions. Mihailo, would love to understand a bit deeper on how the decentralized sequencer would work. Given that transaction fees now become a bit irrelevant, will the rest follow Proof of Stake fundamentals? Where each validator gets exclusive access to mine a block? And the number of blocks it mined depended on the stake?
Looking forward to more announcements
5 Likes
@MihailoBjelic - nicely laid out.
This doesn’t remove the multisig’s ability to pause the bridge? Correct?
The benefits of this proposal (particularly getting rid of re-orgs) are good enough that I wouldn’t want to slow this initiative.
That said, the biggest risk with Polygon imo is the bridge. So it’s worth asking the question of whether this proposal could go further and tackle that risk.
Unless liquidity moves to zkEVM (unlikely?) , it would seem getting rid of the multi-sig should be a big priority- higher than the UX benefits this proposal brings.
2 Likes
I’m only IN favor, the main thing is that the Matic token or the new Pol token remains a gas token, or alternatively, the commissions that will be received in the Ether before burning are exchanged for Matic/Pol and burned further to increase the value of the coin
1 Like
ZK proofs enable validation of huge batches of transactions in a very short amount of time and with very little computation. This could be used to increase the throughput of Polygon PoS, which currently relies on native transaction execution.
1 Like
Hi, currently zkevm gas cost is ~$0.30, with Validium on the original PoS chain will this fee cost be substantially reduced?
2 Likes
FYI.
I recently got the answer from Polygon team.
There are no estimated timelines for this migration plan (PoS → zkValidium).
2 Likes