Ethereum Builders Face Dilemma Over Payment Structures Amid Evolving Protocols

In a recent discussion held from September 8-11, contributors to the Ethereum ecosystem, including Jason Vranek from Commit-Boost, highlighted the financial implications for builders funding protocol-backed payments. These builders face costs associated with idle Ethereum, failed deliveries, and the potential cancellation of offers, which could make trusted connections more appealing.

As of September 13, Ethereum.org has listed Glamsterdam as a project testing on development networks, with a mainnet launch anticipated in the fourth quarter of 2026. Lido contributors are currently debating a proposed direction ahead of a future DAO vote, with Glamsterdam's technical purpose distinct from market choices.

The Ethereum Foundation's priorities, outlined on September 7, include the introduction of fork-choice enforced inclusion lists (FOCIL), which would allow validators to impose inclusion requirements on builders’ blocks. This mechanism is part of a broader roadmap aimed at enhancing transaction processing.

The proposed Enshrined Proposer-Builder Separation (ePBS) formalizes the relationship between validators proposing blocks and builders assembling transactions. The design, under review as EIP-7732, accommodates two payment forms: collateral-backed payments and trusted payments, which depend on the builder's commitment to honor payment routes.

Vranek identified three potential costs for builders: maintaining ETH reserves for payments, covering valuable blocks, and dealing with committed payments that may remain due even if delivery fails. These costs could influence how much builders are willing to pay for block-building opportunities.

In contrast, Coinbase-backed Base has faced challenges in aligning with Ethereum on account abstraction standards. The breakdown in collaboration over EIP-8141 and EIP-8130 highlights the growing divergence between Ethereum and its layer-2 networks, as competition drives each to adopt features at different paces. This split raises questions about the inherent benefits of layer-2 networks for Ethereum's long-term strategy.