Meeting Time: Thursday, March 12, 2026 at 14:00 UTC (90 minutes)
The team discussed implementing EIP-8037 for state gas accounting in BAL devnet 3 and decided to proceed with testing while planning future simplifications. The group debated whether to make frame transactions a headliner for the H-star fork, with mixed support from different clients and concerns about implementation complexity and timeline. After discussing various technical aspects and client preferences, the team ultimately decided to delay the final decision on frame transactions as a headliner for two weeks to allow more time for further discussion and clarification of implementation details.
The team discussed the implementation of EIP-8037 for state gas accounting in BAL devnet 3. There were concerns about the complexity and potential issues with the EIP, particularly regarding refunds and testing. The group decided to proceed with devnet 3 using EIP-8037 as-is to gather real-world data, while planning to discuss potential simplifications in a breakout session next week. They also decided to reject SSZ and Lucid proposals as H-star headliners, leaving frame transactions as the main candidate for discussion. Felix provided an update on recent changes and research related to frame transactions, emphasizing the need for more engagement with the wallet developer community.
The team discussed the status of frame transactions as a potential headliner for the H-star fork. Currently, three clients favor no headliner, while two support frame transactions as a headliner. Ben from Besu explained their preference for frame transactions as a regular EIP rather than a headliner, due to uncertainty about implementation readiness. Mark from Erigon expressed support for co-developing frame transactions and Lucid together, but emphasized the importance of not delaying the fork. Felix argued that frame transactions represent the best opportunity for native account abstraction and should be considered as a headliner, given its potential benefits and mempool compatibility improvements.
The team discussed whether to make Frame Transactions a headliner for Ethereum 2.0. Vitalik highlighted synergies between Frame Transactions and Native Account Abstraction, while Nico raised concerns about the timeline for post-quantum resistance upgrades. The group debated the adoption potential of Frame Transactions compared to EIP-7702, with Derek arguing that Frame Transactions offer more comprehensive account abstraction capabilities. Ansgar noted that only two clients (Geth and Erigon) support Frame Transactions as a headliner, suggesting it may not be approved for that status. The discussion included debate about Reth’s involvement in the decision-making process due to potential conflicts of interest with their competing Tempo Transactions proposal.
The team discussed whether to make frame transactions a headliner for the next Ethereum fork. While some clients like Geth and Reth support it as a headliner, others including Besu and Nethermind are uncertain or opposed due to concerns about mempool rules and implementation complexity. The group ultimately decided to delay the final decision for two weeks to allow more time for discussion and clarification of the mempool rules and transaction pool implementation details. The default outcome would be not selecting frame transactions as a headliner, but the champions were encouraged to address specific concerns about usability and mempool functionality in the meantime.
r1+Sh?6p)r1+Sh?6p)r1+Sh?6p)YouTube Stream Links: