scalability

Block size and scalability, explained

Block size and scalability trade-off involves optimizing transaction capacity while ensuring network performance amid increasing demand.

Block size is important for maximizing storage efficiency and transaction throughput in file systems and blockchain contexts. 

The amount of data processed or transferred in a single block within a computer system or storage device is referred to as the block size. It represents the basic unit of data storage and retrieval in the context of file systems and storage.

Read more

Blockchains like Solana brag about ‘speed’ — but it’s misleading

Developers love to tout the number of transactions that blockchains can process per second. Unfortunately, that fixation often distracts from other important issues — such as network security.

The throughput of blockchains — namely, their ability to process X number of transactions per second (TPS) — is often touted in such a way as to downplay other considerations, such as decentralization and security. The blockchain trilemma, of course, acknowledges that succeeding in all three areas is challenging, though not impossible.

There is no denying that throughput and scalability are important, indeed vital if blockchains are eventually to become the rails on which the financial system is run. However, there is a major misconception surrounding the metric used to assess the scalability of layer-1s and 2s.

Although super-fast blockchains love nothing more than to trumpet their TPS numbers, it is a rather inadequate method for assessing throughput and fails to accurately represent legitimate blockchain transactions. What’s more, numbers are often reported in inconsistent or haphazard ways, making it tricky to compare projects and obscuring what matters most in practice.

So, when networks brag about five-figure TPS speeds, take their audacious claims with a healthy pinch of salt.

A missold metric

If blockchain technology is ever going to be adopted at scale, it must be capable of handling huge volumes of data at high speed. That way, people can access the network when they need it, without contending with logjams or having to pay eye-watering transaction fees. This is clear.

However, a high TPS doesn’t necessarily assure this, as the figure is usually measured by dispatching a protocol token from one wallet to another, as expeditiously as possible. This is the most basic transaction that can be made on a blockchain. Transferring protocol tokens is not a very computationally intensive transaction, which is why it is cheaper to send Ether (ETH) than, say, transfer an ERC-20 — the latter contract contains much more complex data.

Related: Programming languages prevent mainstream DeFi

Indeed, the majority of transactions are more complex than simple transfers. DeFi transactions, for instance, are resource-intensive, which explains why token swaps cost more in gas than simple transfers. Moreover, some chains include transactional data that isn’t usually calculated as transactions on other networks.

In the case of Solana, around 80% of transactions are made up of its own consensus messages, which are needed to coordinate validators. Despite being processed separately from on-chain transactions, they are confusingly batched with user transactions on Solana’s blockchain, giving an inaccurate measure of its true TPS.

Throughput isn’t the only gauge of blockchain performance, of course: Latency refers to how quickly a transaction can get confirmed after it is submitted. This, too, has its own unit of measurement — namely, block time (the time between blocks being added to the chain) and time to finality (when a block passes the threshold beyond the risk of reversion).

Although throughput is seen as the big-ticket number, users actually care more about latency — how quickly their transactions execute — and how much they have to pay in transaction fees. Like throughput, latency is complex, as it varies according to numerous factors, including transaction fees (on some chains, you can pay more to get a higher priority of inclusion), system demand and batching rules.

Swaps per second > TPS

Given the frenzied activity we have witnessed in decentralized finance over recent years — swapping, lending and collateralizing — such transactions are more reflective of how blockchains are actually being used to transfer value. Unlike a simple A-to-B transfer that doesn’t require much computation or data reading, swaps are highly complex.

In such a transaction:

  • The balance of the liquidity pool must be measured/read to determine the swap rate
  • Token A is sent from the end-user to the swap pool
  • Token B is sent from the swap pool to the end-user
  • The pool must then be rebalanced
  • A fee is typically taken out, and the yield is transferred to yet another account

If it isn’t already obvious, this process calls for an entirely new method of measurement — one that does not account for non-transactional data a la Solana: swaps per second (SPS). As evidenced by research compiled by consumer insights agency Dragonfly, a perfect benchmark to assess throughput is to fill an entire block with Uniswap v2-style trades and assess how many trades actually clear per second. The effect is to produce a simple apples-to-apples comparison of Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) blockchains, more so than any TPS measurement could attain.

Related: The world could be facing a dark future thanks to CBDCs

Dragonfly’s research found that Solana’s mainnet can likely perform around 273 swaps/second on an automated market maker — a far cry from its advertised 3,000 TPS. BNB Smart Chain, meanwhile, managed 194.6 TPS (claimed: 300 TPS) and Avalanche a maximum of 175.68 (claimed: 4,500 TPS).

Better benchmarking is required

For the avoidance of doubt, no metric is perfect. Any comparison of blockchains must necessarily account for different elements, such as decentralization, usability, security, tooling, etc. But it’s quite clear that swaps per second are a better gauge of performance and throughput than transactions per second.

Based on the findings of Dragonfly, not to mention the EOS Network Foundation’s similar benchmarking for the EOS EVM, blockchains have a long way to go before they’re ready for mainstream adoption.

Zack Gall is the co-founder and chief communications officer of the EOS Network Foundation. He previously co-founded Dappiness Development Studio and worked as the head of community and developer relations for LiquidApps. He graduated from Muskingum University in 2009 with a BA in communication and media studies.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Gnosis Chain spends $5M on validator incentive program for decentralization

The program offers 388 mGNO to each of the first ten validators that runs in a listed country.

Gnosis Builders, developer of blockchain network Gnosis Chain, has announced a $5 million project to increase the number and diversity of validators through incentive mechanisms. The new project is called “Gnosis VIP,” according to an April 18 announcement from the company.

As part of the new project, Gnosis is launching a “Geographic Diversity Program” that seeks to increase the number of countries Gnosis Chain validators are located within.

The network currently has over 100,000 validators spread across 60 countries, and the program’s goal is to increase the number of countries to 180 by year’s end, the announcement said.

According to the program’s official webpage, for each of the 90 countries listed, the first ten validators that start operating within them will receive 388 meta Gnosis (worth $1,368.18 at April 12 prices) over the course of six months. Meta Gnosis (mGNO) is the wrapped and staked version of the network’s native coin, Gnosis (GNO). Each mGNO can be redeemed for 1/32 GNO.

The first payment of 38 mGNO ($134) will be disbursed after the first 30 days the node operates. The size of the payment will increase each month, and the last payment at the end of the six months will be for 98 mGNO ($345.57).

Related: 1Inch network expands to Gnosis Chain and Avalanche

In an email statement to Cointelegraph, Gnosis CEO Martin Köppelmann expressed hope that the new program will help to improve both the security and performance of Gnosis Chain:

“A diverse validator set is paramount for a resilient and secure network […] Geographical diversity hedges the network against both natural and jurisdictional disasters [and] can also improve the performance of a network; by having validators located in different parts of the world, transactions can be processed more quickly and efficiently.”

Debates often rage in the crypto community over which networks are the most decentralized, with many experts claiming that a network cannot be scalable, secure, and decentralized at the same time. This conflict in design philosophy is often called the blockchain trilemma.

In his email statement, Köppelmann emphasized that geographical diversity is only one aspect of decentralization, and others are also important to ensure resilience and security.

Ethereum layer 2 bridging up sixfold year-on-year in Q1 — Alchemy

Layer 2s also saw increased development activity, with year-over-year smart contract deployment increasing by 160%.

Ethereum layer 2s, such as Optimism, Arbitrum and Polygon, increased in popularity in the first quarter of 2023, according to a report from Web3 development platform Alchemy. Over 635,000 Ethereum users bridged crypto assets to these networks from January to March, an increase of 44% over the fourth quarter of 2023 and 518% over the first quarter of 2022.

The report, titled simply “Web3 Development Report,” cited Dune Analytics as its source for this data. It showed that only 103,000 users made bridging transactions to layer 2s in the first quarter of 2022, whereas the same three months saw over 635,000 users perform these transactions.

Alchemy suggested that this increased activity may have been reinforced by successful airdrops from Optimism and Arbitrum in Q1, 2023.

In addition to increased asset bridging from users, layer 2s also showed greater activity from developers. Although the deployment of smart contracts related to layer 2s decreased by 30% relative to Q4 2022, it still increased by 160% when compared to Q1, 2022, the report said.

The crypto industry is coming off the back of a steep downturn in trading volume and crypto prices during 2022, with scandals like the UST depegging and FTX collapse causing many investors to shy away. But despite this negative sentiment, users still flocked to these new scalability solutions.

Related: 3 signs Arbitrum price is poised for a new record high in Q2

The Ethereum ecosystem as a whole also showed increased developer interest. Ethereum software development kits (SDKs) such as Ethers.js, Web3.js, Hardhat and Web3.py were downloaded 1.3 million times in Q1 2022. This became 1.9 million in the first quarter of 2023, an 8% increase. In addition, downloads of the MetaMask SDK, a tool used to develop apps that can interact with Ethereum wallet MetaMask, increased in each month of the first quarter.

Ethereum layer 2s have been offered as a solution to Ethereum’s scalability problem, which has been periodically causing high gas fees since as early as 2020. Some experts have argued that sharding the Ethereum network will also help to cut down on gas fees.

This story was updated on April 18 to clarify that the number of users bridging has increased by 518%, not the amount of assets bridged.

Bitcoin market cap ‘flips’ payments giant Visa for the 3rd time

While the collapse of FTX shaved $100 billion off of BTC’s market cap in just four days last year, BTC has managed to fully recover and stack on another $65 billion.

A 48% Bitcoin (BTC) price surge since the start of the year has pushed BTC’s market cap past that of payment processing giant Visa once again.

With the BTC price currently at $24,365, its market cap of $470.16 billion is now marginally above that of Visa, which has a market cap of $469.87 billion, according to CoinMarketCap.

BTC has “flippened” Visa again. Source: CoinMarketCap.

This is the third time that BTC has “flippened” the market cap of Visa, according to Companies Market Cap.

The first time came in late December 2020, when BTC also happened to hit $25,000 for the first time. This was achieved during a price surge that saw BTC rally from $10,200 in September 2020 to $63,170 seven months later, in April 2021.

Visa re-took the lead between June and October 2022, which then saw BTC surpass Visa for a very brief moment on Oct. 1 before the payments company re-captured the lead again.

This lead was widened when the collapse of cryptocurrency exchange FTX shaved off over $100 billion from the BTC in four days between Nov. 6-10, 2022.

However, since then, BTC has fully recovered and stacked an additional $65 billion on top of its Nov. 6 market cap of $408 billion to overtake the payment processing giant.

It should be worth noting that given the small difference in market cap between BTC and Visa, the two are currently flipping each other by the hour. 

Related: What is the Lightning Network in Bitcoin, and how does it work?

As for BTC’s impressive start to 2023, its third “flippening” of Visa came on the back of 14 consecutive days of price increases between Jan. 4-17.

BTC is also well ahead of the second largest payment processing network Mastercard, which currently has a market cap of $345.24 billion, according to Google Finance.

BTC is still however down 63% from its all-time high of $69,044, which it reached on Nov. 10, 2021.

Getting rid of crypto staking would be a ‘terrible path’ for the US — Coinbase CEO

Banning retail crypto staking in the United States would result in even more businesses moving offshore, argues Coinbase co-founder Brian Armstrong.

The CEO and co-founder of cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase, Brian Armstrong, believes that banning retail crypto staking in the United States would be a “terrible” move by the country’s regulators. 

Armstrong made the comments in a Feb. 9 Twitter thread which has already been viewed over 2.2 million times, after noting they’ve heard “rumors” that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission “would like to get rid of crypto staking” for retail customers.

“I hope that’s not the case as I believe it would be a terrible path for the U.S. if that was allowed to happen.”

Armstrong did not share where the rumors originated but noted that staking was “a really important innovation in crypto.”

“Staking brings many positive improvements to the space, including scalability, increased security, and reduced carbon footprints,” he added.

Armstrong also referenced an Oct. 5 blog post from crypto investment firm Paradigm, which argued that Ethereum’s transition to proof-of-stake and its subsequent “staking” model does not make it a security.

The Paradigm post came just a few weeks after SEC Chairman Gary Gensler suggested that proof-of-stake (PoS) cryptocurrencies could trigger securities laws. He made the remarks Sept. 15, while speaking to reporters after a Senate Banking Committee meeting.

Armstrong also lambasted the current lack of regulatory clarity in the U.S. and subsequent “regulation by enforcement” that he says is driving companies offshore, such as crypto exchange FTX.

He has reiterated calls for regulation that provides clear rules for the industry while preserving innovation.

Related: Crypto exchange Kraken faces probe over possible securities violations: Report

According to Staking Rewards, the top four staked cryptocurrencies by market cap account for over $55 billion in staked assets, suggesting a country-wide ban would be a huge hit to the country’s crypto industry, which has already seen an exodus of crypto-related businesses.

Top crypto assets by staking market cap. Source: Staking Rewards

Some industry commentators have suggested that the SEC might go after centralized parties that offer staking services rather than the technology itself, arguing that the agency attacking the latter would be a losing battle that would “crush them in precedent.”

The general counsel for Delphi Digital’s research and development arm, Gabriel Shapiro, suggested there is a strong argument that staking services provided by centralized exchanges like Coinbase constitute a security, drawing parallels between them and other “Earn” products.

Coinbase is currently subject to an ongoing SEC probe, which Coinbase revealed in an Aug. 9 SEC filing was in relation to its staking rewards among other offerings.

App-specific blockchains remain a promising solution for scalability

Building an interoperable network of blockchains dedicated to a specific purpose appears to be a viable alternative to layer-2 scalability solutions.

App-specific blockchains, or appchains, are specifically designed to support the creation and deployment of decentralized applications (DApps). In an appchain, each app runs on its separate blockchain, linked to the main chain. This allows for greater scalability and flexibility, as each app can be customized and optimized for its specific use case.

Appchains are also an alternative solution for scalability to modular blockchains or layer-2 protocols. Appchains present similar characteristics to modular blockchains, as it is a type of blockchain architecture that separates the data, transaction processing and consensus processing elements into distinct modules that can be combined in various ways. These can be thought of as “pluggable modules” that can be swapped out or combined depending on the use case.

This separation of functions is why there’s greater flexibility and adaptability to appchains compared to traditional, monolithic blockchain architectures, where these functions are all built into one program. They allow for the creation of customized, sovereign blockchains — tailored to meet specific needs and use cases — where users can focus on specific tasks while offloading the rest to other layers. This can be beneficial regarding resource management, as it allows different parties to specialize in different areas and share the workload.

The scalability of blockchain technology is a key factor for its future success. Due to the scalability issues in layer-1 blockchain architecture, there has been a shift toward using modular blockchains or layer-2 protocols, which offer solutions to the limitations of monolithic systems.

Technology, Security, Cybersecurity, Scalability
Scalability is one side of the blockchain trilemma facing developers.

As a result, the adoption of layer-2 networks is increasing, as they provide a way to address scalability and other issues in current blockchain networks, particularly for a layer-1 like Ethereum. Layer-2 protocols offer lower transaction fees, fewer capacity constraints and faster transaction speeds that paved the way for its growing adoption, catching the attention of 600,000 users.

Appchains vs. monolithic chains

Appchains are not entirely different from monolithic chains. Monolithic chains, like appchains, follow the fat-protocol thesis where a single chain handles most decentralized finance (DeFi) activity and settles everything on one layer with a valuable token. However, layer-1 blockchains are hard to scale. Appchains don’t currently have the same limited space issues as monolithic chains, but they can use modular solutions in the future if necessary.

“The fundamental value proposition of appchains is sovereign interoperability,” explained Stevie Barker, a researcher at Osmosis Labs, a decentralized trading protocol on the Cosmos ecosystem. He told Cointelegraph: 

“Appchains are sovereign because they have precise control over their entire stack and any other area of blockchain structure and operations they want to customize. And they are interoperable because appchains can freely interact with each other.”

Appchains can optimize for user experience and make execution faster, easier and more efficient. They can also secure their chain by recruiting validators to implement code, produce blocks, relay transactions and more. Alternatively, they can borrow the security from another set of validators, interchain security, or combine both options to share security among the entire interchain.

Related: US federal agencies release joint statement on crypto asset risks and safe practices

Osmosis has developed a new take on proof-of-stake called “superfluid staking” that aims to improve both security and user experience. This approach allows liquidity providers to stake the tokens in their liquidity pool (LP) shares to help secure the chain. In return, they will receive staking rewards in addition to their LP rewards, which can help increase their capital efficiency. This can be a more seamless and integrated approach to staking, as liquidity providers can simultaneously earn rewards for their LP and staking activities.

With current advancements, the entire interchain will be able to use its staked assets for DeFi activities without risking centralization or compromising chain security, as is often the case with traditional liquid staking derivatives. This will allow users to take advantage of DeFi opportunities while maintaining the security and decentralization of their staked assets. Valentin Pletnev, CEO and co-founder of Quasar, a decentralized appchain designed for asset management, told Cointelegraph:

“Owning the entire stack from top to bottom allows for easy value generation and purpose for the token — it also allows for higher efficiency as chains can be designed around a specific use case and optimized for it.”

Appchains also can effectively manage Maximal Extractable Value (MEV), which refers to the profits obtained by those who have the power to decide the order and inclusion of transactions. MEV has been a problem for DeFi users across various ecosystems. However, appchains can more quickly implement on-chain solutions that significantly reduce malicious MEV and redirect healthy arbitrage profits from third parties to the appchain itself. This can help improve the user experience and reduce the potential for exploitation in the DeFi ecosystem.

Appchains allow for radical blockchain experiments to be carried out quickly. While Tendermint and the Cosmos SDK are remarkable technologies that enable apps to spin up inter-blockchain communication (IBC) protocol-ready blockchains quickly, the whole Cosmos stack is not necessary to become an IBC-connected appchain. Barney Mannerings, a co-founder of Vega Protocol, an application-specific blockchain for trading derivatives, told Cointelegraph:

“As the space is moving toward a multichain and multi-layered world — in which assets can be moved between chains and specific scaling layers — a distribution of an application on multiple hubs can make sense.”

Appchains offer a path for the new communication standard of blockchains. Native token transfer between ecosystems eliminates bridges and allows for native token transfer cross-chain.

App-specific blockchains also offer several valuable benefits that make them attractive for developers and users alike. Their ability to improve applications’ scalability, performance, security and interoperability makes them a valuable tool for building the next generation of software. As the technology continues to evolve, we will likely see more and more developers adopting app-specific blockchains for their applications.

Related: Blockchain Interoperability, Explained

However, the use of multiple appchains can make them more complex and difficult to manage compared to other types of blockchain technology. Since each app runs on its blockchain, managing and maintaining multiple blockchains can be resource-intensive and time-consuming. Integrating different app chains can be challenging due to potential compatibility issues.

Overall, the benefits and drawbacks of app chains depend on the specific use case and requirements of the DApps under development. In some cases, app chains may provide the ideal solution for building and deploying DApps, while other types of blockchain technology may be more suitable in others.

zkSync developer Matter Labs raises $200M, commits to open-sourcing platform

Over 150 projects — including Chainlink, Uniswap and Aave — have signaled their intent to deploy on the layer-2 blockchain.

Matter Labs, the developer behind the Ethereum Virtual Machine-compatible zkSync, has received major industry backing as it pledges to fully open-source its platform — marking the first such initiative for a zk-Rollup technology. 

Matter Labs confirmed on Nov. 16 that it had closed a $200 million Series C funding round co-led by Blockchain Capital and Dragonfly, with additional participation from LightSpeed Venture Partners, Variant and existing investor Andreessen Horowitz. The company has now raised $458 million in financing across all rounds, including $200 million from BitDAO that’s earmarked for funding ecosystem projects.

Founded in 2018, Matter Labs is working to scale Ethereum through zero-knowledge proofs, a digital authentication process that enables seamless data sharing between two parties. Ethereum has enjoyed widescale acceptance among developers in the blockchain community, but mainstream adoption of its technology has been partially hindered by scalability issues. As a zk-Rollup technology, zkSync provides a layer-2 scalability solution for Ethereum that maintains the network’s security and decentralization features.

Over 150 projects have signaled their intent to launch on zkSync’s mainnet, which was released on Oct. 28 as part of a multistage process to bring the protocol into full production. Some of its most notable partners include Chainlink, Uniswap, Aave, Curve, 1inch and SushiSwap.

In addition to the funding announcement, Matter Labs disclosed that its zkSync technology would be released through an open-source MIT License later this quarter. This gives developers the ability to view, modify and fork the code.

In an interview with Cointelegraph, Matter Labs’ chief product officer, Steve Newcomb, said his firm wanted to “drive consensus in open source,” which is why everything in the mainnet release will be fully open-sourced by MIT’s standard. He explained that by open-sourcing the protocol, zkSync could become the layer-2 standard for the industry.

“In crypto, one of the major things we want to stop is centralized censorship. Anything other than full open source is centralized censorship of code,” Newcomb said. “We can’t decide who is right or wrong or good or bad.”

Related: Ethereum-scaling protocol zkSync’s layer-3 prototype set for testing in 2023

Although venture capital has flowed freely into blockchain projects for the past two years, deteriorating market conditions have caused investors to be much more cautious in recent months. According to Cointelegraph Research, venture funding in the crypto and blockchain industry fell 66% quarter-on-quarter to $4.98 billion. Still, 2022 is shaping to be a record year in terms of funding deals and total capital raised. 

Celestia Foundation raises $55M for modular blockchain architecture

The company claims that the technology will solve the challenges inherent when deploying and scaling blockchains.

Celestia Foundation announced on Oct. 18 that it had raised $55 million in a funding round led by Bain Capital Crypto, Polychain Capital, Placeholder, Galaxy, Delphi Digital, Blockchain Capital, NFX, Protocol Labs, Figment, Maven 11, Spartan Group, FTX Ventures and Jump Crypto, as well as angel investors Balaji Srinivasan, Eric Wall and Jutta Steiner.

Celestia is building a modular blockchain architecture with the hope of solving challenges inherent when deploying and scaling blockchains. The company suggested that it intends to build infrastructure that will make it easy for anyone with the technical know-how to deploy their own blockchain at minimal expense.

The company indicated that its modular blockchain architecture will focus on improving scalability, shared security and sovereignty issues, making it easier for developers to freely choose their own execution environments, such as EVM, Solana VM and more. In addition, it claimed that its specialized chains are less constrained and break the rigidity of monolithic chains into flexible components, promising greater scale, security, and decentralization.

Mustafa Al-Bassam, co-founder of Celestia, said:

“Web3 cannot scale within the constraints of a monolithic framework. We envision a blockchain ecosystem with modular data availability layers and execution environments that all integrate together. We believe modular blockchains are the next generation of scalable blockchain architectures.”

Projects within Celestia’s current ecosystem include Eclipse, Constellation, dYmension and 26 projects from Celestia’s fellowship — a program that supports and mentors modular builders.

In May, Celestia launched its testnet, Mamaki, with an upgrade scheduled for late October 2022.

Related: M31 Capital launches $100M in Web3 investment fund with $50M in commitments

Despite the ongoing crypto winter, venture capitalists appear to have an insatiable appetite for the Web3 industry. According to Cointelegraph Research, venture firms invested $14.67 billion into the sector in the second quarter of 2022, effectively matching first-quarter commitments.

Ripple wants to bring Ethereum smart contracts to the XRP Ledger

The EVM-compatible XRP Ledger sidechain is set to undergo its second phase in early 2023, which will make the chain permissionless and improve scalability.

Ripple users may be able to interact with Ethereum-compatible decentralized applications (DApps) in the future following the launch of a test phase of Ripple’s new XRP (XRP) Ledger sidechain.

The launch of the sidechain was shared in a Tweet by blockchain development firm Peersyst Technologies on Oct. 17, noting that the new sidechain is compatible with Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM).

This means that Ripple users could eventually have access to DApps like Uniswap (should it port over) and Web3 wallets such as MetaMask and XUMM Wallet.

The new sidechain also comes with a cross-chain bridge built to transfer XRP and other assets between the EVM-supported sidechain and the XRP Ledger Devnet.

According to RippleX software engineer Mayukha Vadari, the release “means developers no longer have to choose between XRPL or EVM-compatible blockchains.”

Developers will also be able to access XRPL’s fast low-cost transactions and bring Solidity-based smart contracts onto XRPL, he said.

The XRP-based EVM-compatible sidechain was custom-built by the Tendermint protocol and aims to process 1000 transactions per second (TPS).

Vadari noted that the first phase of the EVM sidechain is now currently available for testing on the XRPL Devnet. Phase two will see the EVM-compatible sidechain transition to a “permissionless” chain with improved scalability.

Vadari said the aim is to achieve block times similar to that of the XRP Ledger for the second phase, which looks set to roll out in early 2023.

“The end goal is phase three: a permissionless EVM sidechain and bridge available on the XRPL Mainnet,” she added.

Related: Evolve or die: How smart contracts are shifting the crypto sector’s balance of power

The news didn’t appear to affect the price of Ripple’s XRP token too much, which is currently priced at $0.476 and is up 23.86% for the month.

The latest announcement comes amid a nearly two-year-long lawsuit against Ripple by the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), which has arguably affected the adoption and development of the global settlement network.

Ripple also continues to make moves in the central bank digital currency (CBDC) space since it first piloted a CBDC Private Ledger for banks in March 2021, having most recently partnered with The Royal Monetary Authority of Bhutan in Sept. 2022.