Home  >  Article  >  IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

PHPz
PHPzOriginal
2024-07-02 16:57:30963browse

Written by IOSG Ventures

Background

Two years ago, at the beginning of the rise of the modular blockchain narrative, we wrote an article proposing our views and predictions on the Data Availability track. As we expected, the modular blockchain narrative has taken hold and driven infrastructure innovation, enhanced network interoperability, and fostered more collaboration and integration within the ecosystem, with various Rollup-as-a-Service (RaaS) solutions (Altlayer, Caldera, Conduit, Gelato) started to emerge. The figure below shows the interface of the Rollup development tool Conduit, showing that deploying Rollup and selecting a DA solution has become extremely simple and convenient.

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source: Conduit

In the past two years, alternative DA solutions (Alt-DA) such as Celestia, EigenDA, Avail, and NearDA have achieved significant development, each demonstrating unique technical advantages and market share. At the same time, with the launch of Ethereum EIP-4844, the cost of using Rollup in Ethereum's native DA layer has been greatly reduced by introducing blobs to replace calldata. Nowadays, developers and project parties face more trade-offs when choosing a data availability layer. This article will track and analyze existing DA solutions, deeply explore their performance costs, technical characteristics and market performance, and propose our views on the future DA track. Developmental perspectives and reflections.

1. Adoption status of existing DA solutions

Rollups using Ethereum’s native DA on-chain solutions are mainly focused on mainstream Layer 2 solutions that have been updated from calldata storage to adapt to Blobs, including Arbitrum, Optimism and Base. As well as Starknet, zkSync and Scroll, etc. Rollup uses Ethereum as the DA layer, and data will be verified and stored by Ethereum's full nodes, benefiting from Ethereum's security, decentralization, continuity of protocol upgrades, and economic incentive mechanisms. Comprehensive L2 occupies an important position in Ethereum's ecosystem and requires the above-mentioned legitimacy brought by using native DA as a core differentiator. (Vitalik believes that the core of rollup is an unconditional security guarantee: even if everyone is against you, you can still withdraw your assets. If data availability depends on external systems, you cannot get this equivalent security)

However, publishing data to the Ethereum mainnet comes with high costs, especially before EIP-4844 (calldata cost is 16 gas per byte, and in December 2023 alone, L2 spent more than 15,000 on DA costs ETH). Therefore, a variety of Alt-DA off-chain solutions have emerged, such as Celestia, EigenDA, which are already online, and Avail, which is not yet online. They reduce data storage and transmission through different technical means, such as DAS, erasure coding, KZG commitment, etc. the cost of.

Among them, Celestia, as a modular blockchain specifically for DA, has become the leading project on the DA track after the mainnet was launched in October 2023. Its main target customers include projects that require modular architecture: cross-chain bridge , settlement layer solutions, defi projects, games, sequencers, and Layer 2 solutions that are not limited to the Ethereum ecosystem. Its existing customers include Omnichain DEX protocol Orderly, modular L2 Manta Pacific customized for EVM-native ZK applications, Base-based L3 Hokum, and DEXs Lyra and Aevo focusing on derivatives trading. As a pioneer in modular design DA layer that is not limited to a specific ecosystem, Celestia’s advantages make it the first choice for many emerging Layer 2 projects.

EigenDA was developed by EigenLabs, using EigenLayer's restaking mechanism to provide an efficient, secure and scalable DA service solution, inheriting the security of the Ethereum mainnet and the huge validator network to a certain extent. EigenDA focuses on providing high-performance DA solutions for the Ethereum ecosystem. As the first Active Verification Service (AVS) on Eigenlayer, EigenDA was launched together with the Eigenlay mainnet in April. The existing customer base is equally diverse, including Ethereum L2 Swell, Celo, Mantle Network, and many others built on Eigenlayer. Other AVS, such as decentralized computing stack Versatus, Polymer, DEX protocol DODO and CyberConnect as Social L2, etc.

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source: EigenDA

2. Tradeoffs between native DA (EIP-4844) and existing Alt-DA 2.1 Ethereum native DA

A brief review of the development and changes of the Ethereum native DA solution. Before the Cancun upgrade, Rollup was mainly used calldata serves as a means of data storage and transmission. High costs due to persistent storage and high network congestion are major barriers to expansion and adoption. EIP-4844, as a mainnet upgrade, introduces Blobs, a new data structure. Blobs can accommodate large-capacity data, but will increase the storage burden on nodes. Over time, storage requirements will continue to increase, which may eventually lead to excessive hardware requirements for running nodes and harm decentralization. Therefore, blobs only need to be stored for about 18 days (4096 epochs) before being deleted.

由于 Blobs 仅需临时存储且使用单独的费用市场, EIP-4844 实施后,取用各大 L2 采用 blob 之后前后 60 天的平均每天的 DA 成本 (Scroll&Starknet 取前后 30 天),成本下降均在 99% 左右。其中由于所上传数据类型的不同(交易数据或是状态差异),采用 OP rollup 的 Layer2 相对于 Zk Rollup 成本下降的受益更为明显。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source: Dune& Growthepie

EIP-4844 Blob 容量和存储特性及定价机制

Blob 的容量和存储特性:

  • 每个区块最多容纳 6 个 Blobs
  • 每个 Blob 可以存储高达 128KB 的数据(即使未完全使用 128KB 空间,发送者也需支付完整的 Blob 费用)

新的 blob gas 市场,运行方式类似于 EIP-1559,根据供需变化来调整 blob 基本费用:

  • 如果区块中的 blob 数量超过目标(当前为 3 个),增加 blob 基本费用。
  • 如果区块中的 blob 数量少于目标,减少 blob 基本费用。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source: IOSG Ventures

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source: Dune / 以太坊区块 blobs 数量 3 天均线

L2 主要使用新引入的类型 3 交易,在以往交易基础上添加 max_fee_per_blob_gas 和 blob_versioned_hashes 字段,分别代表用户愿意支付的每 blob gas 的最大费用和 kzg_to_versioned_hash 的哈希输出列表。

这种新的定价机制意味着类型 3 交易仍然需要 max_fee_per_gas 和 max_priority_fee_per_gas 字段,并受现有 EIP-1559 市场的约束。除了 blob 空间外,类型 3 交易仍需支付其使用的 EVM 空间。

因此, blobs 仍然存在区块空间的争用,造成成本的不确定性,因为每个区块的 blob 空间有限,而 blob 的 gas fee market 是根据需求动态调整的。

所以,以太坊作为通用链,短板还在于区块空间的不确定性——可能突然有类似 NFT Minting、空投申领等链上活动的出现导致链上拥堵,Blob 的定价就会被抬高,使得 Rollup 没有办法估计成本基础。这会造成 Rollup 开支预算不确定导致利润率不稳定,提升了还处于起步阶段的新项目的使用壁垒,项目方难以确定以太坊 DA 是否能作为长期的方案。下图中大部分时间使用 blob 会比 calldata 便宜 98% 左右,但下图中可见某一时段使用 Blobs 仅比使用 Calldata 便宜 59%。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:Ethernow

我们计算两次 blob 传输的费用举例:

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:Ethernow

图中为一次 2024 年 03 月 28 日某一区块中 Zksync 的 Validator Timelock 的类型 3 交易, 我们根据 blob 费用,执行基础费用和优先费用分解计算一下它的数据成本:

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

假设以太坊的价格为 $3600,当时使用 1Mib blob 的数据成本大概为:

4×0.018ETH×3600USD/ETH = 259.2USD

我们再取 6 月 24 日的一次 zksync era 的类型 3 交易:

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:Ethernow

彼时主网活动略有下降,分解计算一下其数据成本:

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

当时使用 1Mib blob 的数据成本大概为:

4×0.0021ETH×3600USD/ETH = 30.24USD

由此可见使用 blobs 传输数据的成本的不确定性,且仍然相对高昂。然而对于一个 rollup 而言,选择 DA 方案时,成本结构的稳定性是关键考虑因素之一。

2.2 Celestia

作为模块化区块链的开山鼻祖,Celestia 专注于提供 DA 层和共识层,将执行层分离出去,从而专门优化 DA 功能,提高效率和可扩展性。Celestia 作为一个链下解决方案的 L1 相比使用以太坊链上的方法具有许多不一样的技术特点,从而减少了数据可用的成本,也相对提供了更高的灵活性和可扩展性。模块化设计使 Celestia 极具灵活性,允许开发者自由选择执行环境,不限于特定的虚拟机(VM),使得 Celestia 能够支持各种不同的应用场景,满足多样化需求。

Rollup 如要整合 Celestia 作为 DA 层,需将执行层产生的交易数据(Data Blob)提交到 Celestia 网络,而不是原来的 Layer 1(以太坊)以确保数据可用性以便验证和交易。Celestia 的数据可用性采样(DAS)技术通过使用二维 RS 纠删码编码方案对区块数据进行重新编码,允许轻节点只需下载区块数据的一小部分即可多轮随机采样验证数据的可用性,并且允许多个节点并行处理不同的数据部分,提升了整体效率。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:Celestia.org

过程中另一项关键技术是 Celestia 引入的命名空间 Merkle 树(NMTs)技术,使得不同的 rollup 只需下载与自己相关的交易数据,从而提高数据处理效率。NMTs 不仅减少了数据冗余,提升了系统性能,还为开发者提供了更高效的数据处理方式。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

安全性方面,Celestia 基于 Tendermint 共识机制,验证人对 Data Blob 达成一致性,确保数据在网络中的可用性和一致性,能够容忍最多三分之一的验证者节点出现故障或恶意行为。通过质押 TIA 代币,Celestia 的验证者受到经济激励,确保诚实行为,并对恶意行为或不当操作进行罚没,从而保障网络的安全性。目前 Celestia 的 TVL 约为 64.4 亿美元,全节点数量为 100 个。

关于可拓展性,Celestia 的区块大小可以根据网络中活跃轻节点的数量进行动态调整。随着更多节点的加入,Celestia 可以安全地增加区块大小,理论上无限提高吞吐量和可扩展性。目前的数据显示,其数据吞吐量约为 6.67 MB/s。

Celestia Blob 容量和存储特性及定价机制:

为了成本的比较,我们在此简单讨论 celestia 的性能以及定价机制。用户在 Celestia 上提交数据时,通过提交 Blob 交易(BlobTx)实现,费用由 blob space 费用和 gas 费组成。

具体来说,每个 Blob 的最大大小限制略小于 2 MiB(1,973,786 字节),每个区块可以包含多个 Blob,具体数量取决于区块的总大小限制。当前最大区块大小为 64x64 shares(约 2 MiB),总共 4096 个 shares,其中一个 share 保留用于 PFB(PayForBlobs)交易,其余 4095 个 shares 用于数据存储。Celestia 的费用市场类似于以太坊的 EIP-1559 机制,使用基于 gas 价格的优先级内存池。交易费用较高的交易会被验证者优先处理,费用由每笔交易的固定费用以及基于每个 Blob 大小的可变费用组成。

根据 celenium 上的 rollup 数据综合统计(6 月 17 日),对于各个整合 Celestia 的客户,使用 Celestia 的 DA 成本在 0.02-0.25 Tia/Mib 之间,折合 6 月 17 日的 $TIA 的价格 ($7.26),几个主要客户的 DA 成本在 $0.15 - $1.82/MiB 不等。因此,与以太坊链上原生 DA 相比,Celestia 提供了一个具有竞争力且稳定的成本结构。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source: Celenium

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:Celenium,gas price 稳定在 0.015UTIA 左右 (1 uTIA = TIA × 10 − 6)

但是, Celestia 本身是 Layer1 区块链网络,需要 P2P 网络对 Data Blob 进行广播和共识,虽然轻节点可以采用 DAS 来确保数据可用,但网络对其全节点仍然有着很高的要求(128 MB/s 下载和 12.5 MB/s 上传),为去中心化和未来吞吐量提升带来障碍。相比之下,EigenDA 采用了不同的架构——不需要做共识,也不需要 P2P 网络。

2.3EigenDA

作为利用 EigenLayer 构建的主动验证服务(AVS),EigenDA 通过再质押机制,利用以太坊的安全性(不需要引入新的验证器集,以太坊验证者可以自由选择加入,EigenDA 的再质押节点是以太坊节点的子集)来保障数据可用性,很好地直接利用了现有基础设施。其主要工作流程为,Rollup sequencer 生成 Blob Data 后将其发送给 Disperser(可由 rollup 本身运行,或通过第三方,比如 EigenLabs),Disperser 会对 Blob Data 进行数据分片,生成纠删码及 KZG 承诺,然后发布到 EigenDA 的节点,而后 EigenDA 的节点会验证 Attestation 并保障数据可用性,验证结束后,节点需将数据进行存储并将数字签名发送回 Disperser。最后,Disperser 讲收集签名并将其上传给以太坊主网上的 EigenDA 智能合约进行最终的聚合签名的正确性验证。

核心的 idea 依旧是利用技术减少对节点的数据存储和验证算力的要求。然而,EigenDA 选择了与以太坊升级相一致的 KZG 承诺验证技术来实现。此外,EigenDA 不依赖共识协议和 P2P 传播,而是使用单播来进一步提高共识速度。

而对于确保 EigenDA 节点真的对数据可用进行了存储,EigenDA 使用托管证明(Proof of Custody)方法,如果出现,惰性验证器任何人都可以向 EigenDA 智能合约提交证明,该证明将由智能合约进行验证。如果验证成功,惰性验证器将被 Slashing。

因此,EigenDA 的解决方案过程都是在以太坊上进行,由以太坊提供共识保证,因此不必受限于共识协议和 P2P 网络低吞吐量的瓶颈,节点无需等待顺序排序,可以直接并行处理数据可用性证明,极大地提高了网络效率。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:Eigenlayer

EigenDA 的容量性能及费用:

EigenDA 目前的节点运营商数量为 266 个。其最大吞吐量目标在 10Mbps。根据 7 天平均数据,EigenDA 的数据吞吐量为 0.685Mib/s,数据存储和传输费用约为 0.001Gas/Byte,折合下来,假设 gas 费用为 10gwei 且以太坊价格为 $3600,每 1MB 数据的费用约为 0.038 美元。总质押 TVL 为 3.33M ETH, 接近 12 亿美元。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:EigenDA.xyz

综合比较分析 Celestiavs. EigenDA

从技术角度来看,Celestia 和 EigenDA 在多个方面存在差异。首先,在节点负载方面,Celestia 的全节点需要处理广播、共识和验证,下载带宽需求为 128MB/s,上传带宽需求为 12.5MB/s,而 EigenDA 的节点不处理广播和共识,带宽需求仅为 0.3MB/s,而且其可以使用以太坊节点的子集。其次,吞吐量方面,Celestia 的最大吞吐量约为 6.67MB/s,而 EigenDA 目标达到最大 10MB/s。在安全性方面,Celestia 的安全性来源于其网络价值,质押价值约为 66.5 亿美元,攻击成本超过 40 亿美元。EigenDA 基于重新质押的资产价值和主网运营者份额继承了一部分以太坊的安全性,目前的 TVL 接近 12 亿美元,大约继承了以太坊 2% 的安全性。

综合来看,Celestia 的竞争优势在于其灵活的模块化设计和较高的数据吞吐量,使其更受中小型 L2 和应用链的青睐。而 EigenDA 的优势采用了使用以太坊基础设施,将数据可用性与共识解耦带来的正统性。未来,随着模块化和应用链双重趋势的发展,Celestia 可能从增量市场中受益,而 EigenDA 则可能在需要更高安全性的以太坊中心市场中占据更大份额。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

3.Avail 和 NearDA

虽然目前 Celestia 和 EigenDA 在数据可用性市场占据主导地位,但未来的竞争格局可能会发生变化。随着 Avail 和 NearDA 这两个项目的潜在上线,数据可用性领域的竞争态势有望进一步加剧。

Avail 是一个专注于数据可用性的区块链网络,旨在为 EVM 兼容的区块链和 Rollups 提供高效的交易排序和数据存储服务。它采用继承自 Polkadot SDK 的 BABE 和 GRANDPA 共识机制,Avail 使用 KZG 多项式承诺作为有效性证明,使用提名权益证明 (NPoS) 支持多达 1,000 个验证者,并通过独特的轻客户端 P2P 网络采样机制提供可靠的备份。

另一方面,NearDA 是由 NEAR Foundation 推出的数据可用性解决方案,主要为 ETH Rollup 和以太坊开发者提供 DA 服务。它的目标是提供一个具有成本效益的 DA 解决方案,去中心化程度与 Near Protocol 相当。目前已经与 Polygon CDK、Arbitrum、Optimism 等以太坊生态系统中的主要参与者建立了战略合作关系。

而短期看来,对于 Rollups 来说,更有效地减少边际成本是最好建立壁垒的方法,其中针对市场状况调整收入和成本模式是比较好的解决方案。

4.针对特定场景的 DA

除了上述这样的针对 rollup 的通用性 DA 以外,当前 DA 赛道也萌生了一些比较早期的,以及针对特定场景的 DA 项目,如专为 AI 定制的高吞吐量 DA 方案 Zerogravity(0G),和比特币 DA 方案 Nubit。

4.1Zerogravity(0G)

AI 应用对数据可用性的需求与传统区块链应用不同。AI 模型训练和运行需要处理大量数据,包括模型参数、训练数据集、实时数据请求等。这些数据需要快速、可靠地存储和传输,以确保 AI 模型的效率和性能。然而,现有的通用 DA 方案,如 Celestia 和 EigenDA,主要设计用于满足普通区块链应用的数据可用性需求,在处理超高吞吐量、低延迟的大规模数据传输时存在一定的局限性。

ZeroGravity (0G) 希望通过模块化设计和高性能数据传输来专门满足 AI 应用的需求。其模块化设计将数据可用性工作流分为数据发布和数据存储两个通道,使得系统可以随着节点数量的增加而线性扩展。数据存储通道专注于大数据传输,确保大数据可以几乎瞬时存储和访问。而数据发布通道则用于保证数据的可用性,通过一个基于多数诚实假设的仲裁系统进行验证。0G Storage 是一个由存储节点网络组成的链上数据库。存储节点通过「随机访问证明」(PoRA) 挖矿过程参与,确保数据的可用性和完整性。它支持存储各种类型的 AI 相关数据,包括模型、训练数据、用户请求和实时检索增强生成 (RAG) 数据。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Source:0G

0G 通过创新的系统设计,声称其目标是实现每秒 GB 级的链上数据传输,远超目前市场上的其他 DA 方案(如 Celestia 和 EigenDA 的每秒 MB 级数据传输)。具体来说,0G 声称其数据吞吐量可达每秒 50 到 100 GB,能够支持需要大量数据传输的 AI 模型训练等场景。

4.2Nubit

在比特币生态逐渐起步并受到关注,有关比特币的各类技术路线也风起云涌,随着这些技术路线的发展,Ordinals、Layer 2、预言机等应用程序对高效、安全的数据可用性解决方案的需求也越来越迫切。这些应用程序需要能够快速、可靠地存储和传输大量数据,以确保其正常运行和用户体验的提升。例如,Ordinals 需要高效的数据存储和传输来支持数字艺术品的创建和交易,Layer 2 解决方案需要高吞吐量和低延迟来实现更好的扩展性,而预言机需要可靠的数据传输来确保数据的准确性和及时性。

Nubit 是比特币生态中首个原生的数据可用性 (DA) 层项目,旨在解决比特币主网吞吐量有限的问题,并为比特币生态的长远发展提供基础设施支持。Nubit 的工作流程包括数据提交、验证、广播、存储、采样和共识等多个步骤,确保数据的高效处理和高可用性。用户提交的数据经过 RS 编码处理后,由验证者节点使用 NuBFT 共识算法进行验证,并生成 KZG 承诺。验证后的数据块被广播到全网,存储节点负责存储完整数据块,而轻客户端通过数据可用性采样(DAS)协议验证数据的可用性。即使在网络故障情况下,节点仍可通过全存储节点和比特币网络上的 KZG 承诺恢复数据。

IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail

Nubit 旨在为比特币生态项目提供基础设施,已与多个项目如 Babylon、Merlin Chain、Polyhedra 等建立了合作关系,Nubit 将降低数据存储成本,比如在铭文市场需求激增的情况下, Nubit 可以服务与比特币 Layer2 大幅降低数据发布成本,使得在比特币上存储和处理数据变得更加经济实惠。

5.Closing Thoughts

分析 DA 赛道的项目差异,我们在安全性(包括数据完整性、网络共识等)、可定制性与互操作性、性能和成本随着这些 DA 方案的广泛采用和不同项目在 DA 层选择上的差异,我们看到了一系列独特的技术和市场定位。

In the future, we believe that more App-Rollups will be launched on the market. However, although the potential market is increasing, the head effect on the DA track is obvious. Celestia, EigenDA, etc. will occupy the main market share, leaving few opportunities for the waist and tail, and competition is also intensifying. The current capacity exceeds demand for Rollup. For example, after the launch of the mainnet, the utilization rate of Celestia network bandwidth has been below 0.1% for a long time, which is far below its maximum daily supported capacity of 46,080 MB. However, compared to Ethereum’s current 15 rollups and 700 MB of data per day, Celestia still has a lot of room for activity.

Of course, it is not ruled out that in the future there may be demands for high DA bandwidth in high-performance networks, or for AI projects, for example. In addition, there are some relatively early DAs for specific scenarios, such as Bitcoin DA, which may be available in niche fields. Good market share. But DA is essentially a to B business, and the income of DA project parties is closely related to the quantity and quality of ecological projects. At this stage, we do not believe that there is a need for too many off-chain DA solutions on the market unless their cost and efficiency achieve a leap of several orders of magnitude.

In general, it seems that DA’s business model now has sufficient supply, but the development of the track is still evolving, and various solutions show different competitiveness in technology and market positioning. Future development will depend on continued technological innovation and dynamic changes in market demand.

References:

https://medium.com/@MTCapital_US/mt-capital-research-da-sector-analysis-comparative-study-of-celestia-and-eigenda-acc07ea5694f

https:// www.theblockbeats.info/news/51171

The above is the detailed content of IOSG: Fighting for supremacy in the modular era, one article explains the DA ecology and competitive landscape in detail. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!

Statement:
The content of this article is voluntarily contributed by netizens, and the copyright belongs to the original author. This site does not assume corresponding legal responsibility. If you find any content suspected of plagiarism or infringement, please contact admin@php.cn