What's Our Roll-Up Status

Would it be possible to get a more comprehensive update on the roll-up situation from the team?

I know the intention has always been to go roll-up route. Then, I know we hit a speed-bump and the roll-up was either delayed, or cancelled in the near term ? Yet, I see other EVM projects actively talking about migrating to a roll-up, so I am just confused what happen on our end.

So, a few questions:

  • What were the different roll-up options we looked at?
  • What in particular was wrong with the roll-up we were planning on going over to that prevented us from migrating?
  • Which features do we have planned that are now delayed or cannot go into effect without a roll-up?
  • What other scaling options are we looking at?
  • What is the estimated time-frame on a roll-up like solution. Are we looking at months or years?



This was addressed in the recent community call I saw. In a nutshell:

Optimism rollups turned out to be more complex than expected. Arbitrum is currently rolling out and gaining traction. But the Sovryn team isn’t sure if either roll-up provides sufficient security guarantees. They’re now looking at ZK-rollups, which they believe is the most elegant solution. But this is a process of many months, most likely.

1 Like

In light of recent events, I would like to bring this topic back on the forum so there is a single post for updates instead of comments scattered around different channels.

John Light had a tweet about a Sovereign Rollup being one step lower than a Validity Rollup. So does it make sense for Sovryn to become a Sovereign Rollup first and later, if it ever becomes possible, become a Validity Rollup?

Or do the Sovryn devs have other plans? Would love some update.

I understand that Sovryn devs have always been very careful with any updates/changes but I would also not want Sovryn to miss the early advantage they have in this subject.


Damn, glad you brought this up! Working to prepare an update for next month.


Thanks for bringing this up!

I am very keen to know where we stand on this issue.

I would have liked some more updates in the last community call about rollups as this topic has been in the background for a fairly long time now. But this could be the start of a renewed conversation.

In response to Ingalandia’s question (during the call) about who should be leading this work, I am of the opinion that Sovryn SHOULD be at the forefront of this research. In John (Light) we have someone who has written perhaps the most detailed article, at least from a bitcoiners perspective, on this subject so it would be disappointing to see someone else come and take over. So far Sovryn has forked useful stuff from other projects, that’s fine and should continue, but I think “the first rollup on BTC” would bring Sovryn the much needed attention that it has lacked so far from the mainstream. Having said that, this is just my opinion as an outside observer, the core team would know better where to spend time and resources.

Yago mentioned multiple chains focusing on scalability, privacy etc, I guess each with its own set of tradeoffs so testing these in parallel (without fund migration from RSK in the beginning) seems like a good approach. Are there any reservations about this idea from the community?

Is it already possible to test a (Sovereign?) rollup for a product like perpetuals? I ask this question because there are a few dexes already using STARKs and doing good volume.

(Can someone please provide a summary of the perps experiment on BSC as I could not find a forum post about it. What were the results and lessons learned going forward?)

Yago also mentioned getting close to a near-trustless peg without any bitcoin softfork, again if the tech is already available then what is the current status? Do we need more dev resources, can the community help in any way? It was STARKWARE and CMSHolding with a 1 BTC donation that funded the ZK-Rollup research, surely the Sovryn community can fund some development as well.

The way I see things, one use case for the SOV token was to align incentives so different people can work towards a common goal, which was to improve the bitcoin ecosystem under the Sovryn umbrella. However, unfortunately I don’t see any outside devs coming and building on Sovryn so far (happy to be corrected if I am wrong), hence my question during the call about the limitations of Rootstock perhaps being a limiting factor. If, as John Light says, anything that can be done on ethereum is possible on rootstock then why hasn’t there been much dev interest? Maybe I need to adjust my expectations but it would have been cool if something like Ordinals was developed under Sovryn. (I dont personally care for NFTs or Ordinals, just that they seem to resonate with a very wide audience)

1 Like

Let’s merge this with this thread: