AMA #15 · Quantum-resistant L1 Target: end of 2029

EF Protocol AMA #15 · 2026-09-16

The Foundation has set the quantum-resistance transition as an official schedule and published a per-fork plan

Most questions focused on the issuance curve, the staking ratio, and the quantum-resistance transition schedule. Foundation researchers publicly stated their personal view that the current staking incentives are unsustainable, and answered quantum resistance with an official target of completion by December 2029 and a per-fork phased plan.

Why it matters

With quantum resistance confirmed as the top priority, it is clear that performance upgrades such as quick slots will be pushed back for the time being. Reducing issuance has not yet reached consensus, but a Foundation researcher specified the requirements and said an EIP is in preparation, so the debate moves to the stage of a concrete proposal. The answer that real-time proving is effectively validated moves up the timeline for the zkEVM transition, which lowers the hardware burden on validators.

Discussion

Issuance curve and staking ratio

Questions followed on whether uncapped growth is itself a problem now that the staking ratio has reached 35%, what it would take for an issuance change to be included in a fork, and what the grounds were for rejecting EIP-8363. Two Foundation researchers, stating that they were giving personal opinions, diagnosed the current structure as unsustainable.

Quantum-resistance transition

There were many questions about the upgrade path to quantum resistance, what Frames opens up right now versus what is needed later, and how the schedule has changed since May. The Foundation's answers converged on the December 2029 completion target and a per-fork phased plan.

L1 zkEVM and protocol simplification

Questions asked how close real-time proving actually is, how many guest programs there will be, and how to reduce the complexity that grows with each upgrade. The Foundation answered that proving performance has already been validated and that it will use the zkEVM and quantum-resistance transitions as an opportunity to clear out old machinery.

L1 privacy

Questions asked whether Ethereum will get shielded transactions like Zcash, and whether a built-in privacy pool can actually handle real payments, and there was also the criticism of why put it on L1 when L2s already exist. The Foundation answered with an approach that does not fix a single pool and with a concrete timeline.

Consensus overhaul and finality time

Questions asked whether the original single-slot finality plan, discussed for years, died when it was absorbed into decoupled consensus, whether the available chain becomes more vulnerable to reorgs, and why the 10-second quick slot is a lower priority.

Client funding and decentralization

Questions asked how to solve the funding difficulties of several client teams and why the EIP to prevent validator concentration was pushed back. The Foundation acknowledged the fundamental tension between neutrality and stable funding, and publicly corrected one error in the tier list.

Glossary

EIPs covered

Forkcast record · ← Core Dev Calls