What stakeholder category do you represent?
Flashbots
What do you view as the top priority theme in this fork & why?
Scaling the L1 without introducing negative externalities.
Which EIP(s) do you favor as a headliner for Glamsterdam?
BALs and ePBS, assuming that the Free Option Problem can be sufficiently mitigated.
If known, what specific impacts would this have on your community?
Enabling trustless exchange between builders and proposers would be a strong change for the ecosystem; disintermediating relays would remove one of the main chokepoints in the MEV supply chain that contributes to geographic centralization and censorship.
Does anything make this an urgent feature for you or your community?
MEV market structure is unstable due to years of indecision on disintermediating relays. The inclusion of rejection of ePBS will force that decision and move us to a different equilibrium.
The leading headliners among client teams are described in a series of blog posts listed here. Do you have any concerns about any particular proposal?
FOCIL’s lack of coverage of blobs makes it only a stepping stone to full CR. If it led to a decrease in the number of local builders, the CR of blob-carrying transactions would be greatly reduced because of the gap in coverage.
Shorter-slot times are very under researched and we’re not confident about their feasibility or the impact that they would have on the geographic decentralization of the validator set.
The current version of EIP-7732 introduces a Free Option Problem that we strongly suggest should be mitigated. Our conversations with searchers have made it clear that failing to mitigate it will lead to a substantial increase in empty blocks on the Network. Extended analysis is available here.
Any additional comments?
We provided an extended MEV-informed opionion on all the consensus layer headline proposals and would encourage everyone to read it.