---
# System prepended metadata

title: cl2-01_fast-finality-roadmap

---

# cl2-01: Fast Finality Roadmap

## Related Talks
- [cl1-01](https://hackmd.io/@willcorcoran/HytiGYt0gg): Fast Finality
- [cl1-02](https://hackmd.io/@willcorcoran/BywxmtF0gx): Fast Synchronous Finality  
- [cl2-03](https://hackmd.io/@willcorcoran/HJY5QYKRge): Fast Finality (whiteboard session 1)
- [cl3-03](https://hackmd.io/@willcorcoran/SJfkVtKRxx): Fast Finality (whiteboard session 2)

## Summary
The Fast Finality Workshop session focused on brainstorming and prioritizing Ethereum's roadmap for faster finality, listing options like Fast Synchronous Finality (FSF), 6-second slots, shorter epochs, 3SF, validator consolidation, validator set capping, pre-confirmations, LMD-GHOST sampling, and decoupled protocols. Discussions emphasized balancing incremental upgrades (e.g., parameter tweaks for 1-minute finality) against major forks (e.g., Lean Consensus with post-quantum signatures in 4-5 years for <10s finality). Key debates included dynamic availability trade-offs (50/50 room split), user research needs (e.g., bridges/exchanges on inclusion vs. finality time), resource allocation (focus on ideal protocols vs. quick wins), governance timelines (2-3 years for 3SF, 4+ for Lean), and validator reduction (from 1M to 16K-100K via incentives/queues). Naming FSF was humorously debated (e.g., LFG for meme appeal). Objectives: decide properties (uptime, inclusion time, resilience), assign research (1-month deadline on decoupled/one-round protocols), and plan user outreach for adoption.

## Key Takeaways
- **Roadmap Options**: FSF (sub-12s confirmation), 6s slots (inclusion time, issuance stability), shorter epochs (trivial parameter change, 2x finality reduction), 3SF (known, implementable in 2-3 years), validator consolidation (UX/tools/queues for 1M to 16K-100K), capping (signal long-term protocol shift), pre-confirmations (fast inclusion), LMD-GHOST sampling (faster DA).
- **Incremental vs. Major Upgrades**: Incremental (e.g., 12min to 1min finality via tweaks) for quick wins/optics; major (Lean Consensus with PQ signatures) for ideal (<10s finality) but 4-5 years; debate on waiting vs. parallel efforts.
- **Properties & Trade-offs**: Dynamic availability (uptime/short asynchrony) vs. complexity/low block time; user needs (bridges need economic finality <1min; most apps suffice with FSF); thresholds (20-33% BFT adv.); post-quantum aggregation for scalability.
- **Timelines & Resources**: 3SF: 2-3 years (specs/proofs/tests); Lean: 4-5 years (PQ, validator reduction prerequisite); focus 1-month research on decoupled/one-round protocols (e.g., Goldfish + BFT); user research on exchanges/bridges/L2s for priorities.
- **Validator Reduction Strategies**: Incentives (issuance curves), queues (faster exits/consolidations), signaling (capping for protocol shift); aim 16K-100K for shorter slots/rounds; hybrid slashing exceptions at forks.
- **Challenges**: Governance (convincing community), client work (no tech debt in Lean vs. incremental tweaks), DA utility (beyond uptime: shorter slots); naming FSF (LFG for memes vs. clarity on assumptions).
- **Next Steps**: 1-month decision on protocol (properties/examples); outreach to staking operators for consolidation; align on FSF naming/timelines; parallel Lean experimentation.

## Speakers
- [Luca Zanolini](https://x.com/luca_zanolini)
- [Yann Vonlanthen](https://x.com/yannvon)
- [Roberto Saltini](https://x.com/robsaltini)
- [Ellie Davidson](https://x.com/ellierdavidson)
- [Francesco d'Amato](https://x.com/fradamt)

## Resources
- No new slides; ad hoc discussion referencing all previous materials.
- [Video](https://youtu.be/mF98KPPo4Pk)

> back to: [Index Page](https://hackmd.io/H4S9OqgnRUWFzavoOhy4aw)

*Note: Summaries were generated in part with the help of AI, so names and terms may not be 100% accurate.*