---
# System prepended metadata

title: cl2-02_lean-rainbow-staking

---

# cl2-02: Lean Rainbow Staking

## Summary
The Lean Rainbow Staking proposal session at the Fast Finality Workshop presented a framework for unbundling staking roles to enhance Ethereum's scaling without compromising security. Key takeaways include splitting validators into specialized roles (attesters, includers, execution proposers) via a 2D separation (heavy/light services; capital/labor), enabling better signals and home node viability. Workflows focus on validator role specialization (staker paradigm with opt-in roles), delegation (tracking balances/ledgers, activation/exit operations), and a stakers matrix/interface for configuration. Design parameters emphasize elastic roles, default (tester + includer) vs. advanced paths, minimum stake for execution proposers, and economics (unified/separate balances, fees, slashing). Discussions covered delegation chains, incentives (redistribution to attract capital), MEV bounds, and trade-offs (e.g., unified balances vs. role isolation). Alignment sought on optimizing for home nodes, delegation in Lean, and CL/EL interactions. Proposal aims for PRs on primitives, with breakout groups for feedback.

## Key Takeaways
- **Framework Basics**: Rainbow staking unbundles roles for L1 scaling; attesters handle protocol duties (attesting, proposing, ZK proofs); includers manage inclusion lists; execution proposers cover builders/MEV.
- **Separation & Specialization**: Heavy (finality-linked) vs. light services; capital (delegators) vs. labor (operators); roles opt-in, delegatable with fees; minimizes LST risks via enshrined mechanisms.
- **Delegation Model**: Delegators as protocol entities; ledger for balances/rewards/slashings; overload activation/exit for operations; no chains (delegators can't accept further delegation).
- **Design Choices**: Staker over validator paradigm; unified balances (overloaded for roles) vs. separate (adds efficiency but complexity); default path optimizes for simplicity, advanced for flexibility.
- **Economics & Incentives**: Redistribute rewards to attract delegation; MEV bounds via unified balances; slashing overloads for roles; accountable safety via weak subjectivity.
- **Challenges**: Unified vs. separate balances (economic analysis, liquidity); role bundling (capital efficiency, centralization risks); ZK proving delegation; CL/EL overhead at boundaries.
- **Next Steps**: Finalize PRs on primitives/role specs; discuss delegation viability, stakers interface; align on home node optimization, post-quantum signatures.

## Speakers
- [Dan Goran](https://x.com/DanGoron2) (EF 5, ESP grantee, proposal lead)
- Vlad Alex (EF 6, proposal co-lead)
- Barnabé Monnot (role specialization, economics)
- Workshop participants (e.g., Justin Drake, Francesco, Roberto on delegation, balances)

## Resources
- [Slides](https://drive.google.com/file/d/171qf6nmn8T4MeeMg2_48sBJE-QOFiUMT/view?usp=drive_link)
- Dan Goron's [lean rainbow staking design note](https://hackmd.io/5Qilm6BgQFmyDux6Gy_ICw?view)
- Barnabé Monnot's [Ethresear.ch post](https://ethresear.ch/t/unbundling-staking-towards-rainbow-staking/18683)
- [Video](https://youtu.be/VVGRfrrxNss)

> 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.*