The Transformation of Ethereum L2: From Fragmentation to Native Decentralization

Recently, discussions about the Ethereum Layer 2 ecosystem have revealed a seemingly contradictory but actually reasonable phenomenon — Vitalik Buterin, a core contributor to Ethereum, has begun to reflect on the “Rollup-Centric” roadmap established five years ago. This is not a rejection of Layer 2 but a confrontation with a deeper issue: while the current Layer 2 ecosystem pursues unlimited scalability, it neglects a fundamental element — decentralization. This reflection is, in fact, a necessary adjustment by Ethereum after recognizing structural flaws in its early strategy.

Current Layer 2 Status: Lack of Decentralization and Fragmentation Dilemma

Objectively, according to data from the L2BEAT platform, there are now over hundreds of active Layer 2 solutions, which should indicate a thriving ecosystem. But the reality behind this is concerning — the vast majority of L2 projects are slow or even stagnant in their decentralization progress.

Since 2022, Vitalik has sharply criticized the existing Rollup architecture. Most Layer 2 solutions adopt what is called “Training Wheels” architecture, meaning they heavily depend on centralized Sequencers and human intervention for operation. L2BEAT’s classification system clearly reflects this — dividing Rollups into three stages based on their decentralization level:

• Stage 0: Fully centralized control, entirely dependent on the operator’s unilateral decisions
• Stage 1: Limited decentralization, with a safety committee but power still concentrated in a few entities
• Stage 2: Fully decentralized, with security guaranteed by the protocol itself

The problem is, many L2 projects, due to regulatory or commercial considerations, may remain permanently at Stage 1. What does this mean? These projects are essentially “second-layer L1s” — borrowing Ethereum’s name but still relying on centralized authority structures for security and neutrality, which conflicts with Ethereum’s core values.

Even more seriously, as the number of Layer 2 solutions increases, a structural crisis is emerging — liquidity fragmentation. Originally, value was concentrated on the Ethereum mainnet, but now it has dispersed into various independent L2 ecosystems, forming countless isolated value islands. Users are forced to jump between different L2s, and the complexity and risks of cross-chain bridges increase significantly. This clearly diverges from the original goal of scalability.

Native Rollup and Pre-Confirmation: Towards Protocol-Native Decentralization

Amid this wave of reflection, the concepts of Native Rollup and Based Rollup have emerged and are gradually becoming the hottest technical topics in the Ethereum community by 2026.

To summarize the essence of Based Rollup in one sentence: it completely abandons an independent Sequencer layer and instead relies directly on Ethereum L1 validators for transaction ordering. In other words, the validation logic of the Rollup is integrated into the Ethereum protocol itself, rather than existing as an external system. What does this change bring?

First, an upgrade in security. Users of Based Rollup no longer need to rely on the honesty of third-party Sequencers but inherit the security model of Ethereum L1 directly. Second, liquidity unification. In Based Rollup, users can atomically call assets on L1 and L2 within a single transaction, without complex cross-chain bridging. This fundamentally addresses the fragmentation problem that plagues the L2 ecosystem.

However, Based Rollup also faces practical challenges. If it strictly follows Ethereum L1’s rhythm (each slot 12 seconds), user experience becomes unacceptable. Currently, Ethereum’s finality confirmation takes about 13 minutes (two epochs), which is too long for financial applications.

This is why Vitalik recently proposed a pre-confirmation mechanism. The idea is clever:

1. Retain low-latency ordered blocks
2. Generate Based Rollup blocks at the end of each slot
3. Submit these blocks to L1
4. Achieve cross-layer composability through pre-confirmation

The core logic of pre-confirmation is: once a transaction is submitted to L1, a specific role (such as the block proposer on L1) commits that the transaction will be included. Although this is not final confirmation, combined with validator votes in Ethereum’s PoS system for each slot, the system can provide a “strong and verifiable” confirmation signal within 15-30 seconds.

The brilliance of this mechanism lies in — it does not introduce a new consensus process but cleverly reuses Ethereum’s existing validator voting system. When a block in an early slot receives enough validator votes, even before finality, the likelihood of rollback under reasonable attack models becomes negligible.

This opens new possibilities for cross-chain systems, settlement layers, and wallet applications — they no longer need to wait the full 13-minute finality but can proceed within 30 seconds based on a strong protocol-level signal. Essentially, Ethereum is refining the balance between decentralization, security, and user experience.

Strategic Shift: From Scalability Pursuit to Decentralization Priority

Looking back from 2026, the main trajectory of the Ethereum ecosystem is undergoing a fundamental shift. The early five-year slogan of “infinite scalability” has given way to a more pragmatic goal of “unification, layering, and endogenous security.”

Notably, several leading L2 solution teams have recently announced they are exploring and adopting Native Rollup solutions to enhance network consistency and synergy. This attitude shift itself indicates — the Ethereum ecosystem is undergoing a necessary but painful optimization process: moving from a focus on “number of chains” back to “protocol unification.”

However, as Ethereum L1 continues to strengthen, and Based Rollup and pre-confirmation mature, a new, more tangible bottleneck is emerging — the biggest limiting factor for ecosystem growth is no longer technical performance but user onboarding experience and barriers.

This aligns with key insights emphasized by wallets like imToken: when infrastructure becomes “invisible,” the real limit to scale is the usability of user interfaces.

Therefore, beyond infrastructure expansion, the future of Ethereum’s ecosystem breaking boundaries and achieving large-scale growth will focus on three more structurally meaningful directions:

First, native account abstraction and lowering entry barriers. Ethereum is advancing native account abstraction, and future user interactions will primarily be through smart contract wallets rather than traditional EOA addresses. This will greatly simplify the cumbersome mnemonic and private key management, lowering the entry barrier to the crypto world to a level comparable to social account registration.

Second, maturity of privacy and zero-knowledge proofs. As ZK-EVM technology matures, privacy protection is no longer a marginal need but a business necessity. Ethereum will maintain on-chain transparency while providing essential privacy safeguards for commercial applications, becoming a core differentiator in blockchain competition.

Third, AI agents with on-chain sovereignty. By 2026, the entities initiating transactions may no longer be humans but AI agents. This raises new trust issues: how to ensure AI agents act according to user intent and are not manipulated by third parties? Ethereum’s decentralized settlement layer will become the most reliable arbiter in this AI economy era.

Returning to the essence: the rebirth of decentralization

Returning to the initial question — is Vitalik really “rejecting” Layer 2? The answer is clear: no. What he rejects is the narrative of excessive fragmentation, detachment from the mainnet, and siloed development of L2s. What he promotes is, in fact, a more pragmatic and powerful future for Layer 2.

From the illusion of “prosperity across hundreds of chains,” to the refined engineering of Based Rollup and pre-confirmation, it is fundamentally about re-strengthening Ethereum L1’s position as the global trust layer through technological means. This is not retreat but an elevation.

This also means — in this pragmatic technological return, only innovations rooted in the new principles of Ethereum, aligned with the mainnet’s heartbeat, will survive and thrive in the next decade of exploration. Projects that pursue independence and differentiation alone will ultimately be phased out. The future of Ethereum belongs to those who understand the essence of decentralization and build in harmony with the protocol layer.