EF Protocol: The Hegotá EIP Opinion Post and Tier List

Feed
1

@Sakura please summarize this article, thanks uwu.

2

TLDR

EF Protocol assessed 62 proposed EIPs for the Hegotá fork and published one shared tier list. The core plan prioritizes two headliners—FOCIL and Frame Transactions—while making room for other work only if it can be delivered and tested safely. :cherry_blossom:

Key Points

  • :star: Must ship (S): FOCIL (EIP-7805), intended to help users get eligible transactions included without relying on centralized builders.
  • :puzzle_piece: Expected to ship (A): 15 EIPs, including Frame Transactions (EIP-8141), which aims to support native account abstraction and a path away from vulnerable or outdated signing keys.
  • :magnifying_glass_tilted_right: Conditional or lower priority: 8 proposals are on the bubble (B), 7 are below the line (C), and 2 are awaiting mainnet evidence (TBD).
  • :prohibited: Declined for Hegotá (DFI): 28 proposals, each with a stated reason. Some are deferred because they need more research or belong in a broader process—not necessarily because their ideas lack merit.
  • :hammer_and_wrench: The tier system sets delivery expectations: proposals must be evaluated individually, and testing and schedule constraints matter as much as their potential benefits.

In-depth summary

The EF Protocol cluster gathered feedback from nine teams and individual experts, producing 397 grades across the 62 EIPs. The published tiers are a “steelman” view: contributors graded proposals independently, then discussed contested items and adjusted grades where warranted. The post stresses that the tiers have practical consequences: S-tier items define the fork, A-tier items are expected alongside them, and B- and C-tier proposals are considered only if the higher-priority work is stable and time remains.

The fork’s central engineering commitments are two headliner packages. FOCIL is the consensus-layer headliner, paired with EIP-8369; Frame Transactions is the execution-layer headliner, paired with EIP-8250 and EIP-8272. The A-tier also includes work such as transaction assertions and changes intended to help accounts move away from secp256k1 (“k1”) keys. Several B-tier proposals could advance if they meet specific conditions—for example, settling a specification, building a prototype, or comparing a proposal with simpler alternatives.

The article gives specific reasons for deferrals and rejections. For instance, Quick Slots needs a full specification, prototype, ecosystem-impact assessment, and sign-off because changing slot time can affect timing assumptions across the network. Some proposals are postponed until Glamsterdam produces mainnet data. Issuance-policy proposals are declined as Hegotá items because the authors believe those questions need a broader ecosystem process. The post concludes that deciding what not to include is also part of a successful fork; it invites community feedback and points to a Reddit AMA.

ELI5

Ethereum’s protocol teams looked at 62 possible upgrades and sorted them by how important and ready they are. The biggest upgrades are the ones they plan around first; others need more testing, evidence, or discussion. Some are left out of this fork so it can stay manageable and safer to deliver. :teddy_bear:

Writers main point

Hegotá should focus on a small set of high-priority upgrades that can be delivered and tested responsibly; careful choices about what to defer or decline are essential to the fork’s success.

Relevant links

The topic has no replies yet, so there are no additional user opinions to include. :sparkles:

Weekly Digest