Image Credit: Shutterstock
- Optimism proposed requiring at least 30 days of public notice before changing upgrade control.
- The Optimism Foundation validates the handover request before the minimum 30-day waiting period begins.
- The waiting period gives users time to assess the new controller before the handover.
Optimism, the Ethereum scaling project behind the OP Stack, has proposed giving users at least 30 days’ public notice before a participating chain takes upgrade control back from its Security Council.
The Nov. 5 proposal would let a chain’s governing authority choose a new upgrade controller. Completing that handover would also end the chain’s Standard Rollup status.
Foundation Would Validate Requests Before the Clock Starts
A chain governor could ask to move upgrade authority to a specified blockchain address, allowing the chain to manage upgrades itself or appoint another party.
The Optimism Foundation would check that the request meets the governor’s existing commitments, including any contractual limits. It would then publish a notice identifying the chain, its network identifier and the relevant contracts on Ethereum.
Only that public notice would start the minimum 30-day waiting period. Afterward, the Security Council would check the notice, elapsed time and recipient address before carrying out the transfer.
A qualifying handover would need no additional Optimism governance vote. Approving the policy would authorize the process, rather than requiring a fresh decision each time a chain wants to leave.
Upgrade Control Determines Who Can Change a Chain’s Contracts
Standard Rollups currently follow governance-approved versions of the OP Stack, Optimism’s blockchain software. Their designation also depends on configuration checks covering matters such as block timing, fault proofs and administrative permissions.
Giving the Security Council upgrade authority is part of that arrangement. During normal operations, the Council carries out governance-approved upgrades and permission changes rather than choosing the changes itself.
Its responsibilities include upgrades to a chain’s Ethereum-based contracts and changes to addresses holding important network roles. Its charter also permits emergency action against security problems without specific governance approval.
Moving those powers to a different address therefore changes who users rely on when the chain’s rules need updating. A new controller could be the chain’s own governance system or a third party selected by its governor.
The notice period would give wallet providers, applications, and users time to assess that controller before the handover. Using the same blockchain software does not mean relying on the same people to approve future changes.
A Completed Transfer Would End Standard Rollup Status
The current Charter allows governance intervention when a chain’s transaction-processing operator censors valid transactions and its governor refuses to replace it. That can include appointing a replacement operator.
After a completed transfer, the chain’s designation would change in the Superchain Registry. Optimism governance would lose its ability to enforce the Charter’s policies through the transferred upgrade authority, and users would depend on the new controller’s security arrangements.
The proposal addresses a gap in the current Charter, which explains how chains qualify but provides no published exit process. Governors currently seeking their upgrade authority back would need a separately arranged governance action.
Approval would change the Charter without requiring a software update or moving any upgrade keys. Each actual handover would still begin with a governor’s request, followed by a validated public notice and the full waiting period.
