The blockchain infrastructure landscape is evolving at a rapid pace, especially in the realm of public chains. While much of the current hype revolves around AI and Bitcoin, it's crucial to step back and examine the foundational shifts happening beneath the surface—particularly in Ethereum (ETH) and modular blockchain architectures. These changes are shaping the future of scalability, security, and interoperability across Web3.
In recent months, key layers of blockchain infrastructure—execution, data availability (DA), and settlement—have seen meaningful technical advancements. Let’s explore these developments in detail, focusing on how they’re redefining performance expectations and opening new design possibilities for next-generation blockchains.
The Modular Shift: Deconstructing Monolithic Chains
Ethereum was once the all-in-one solution for execution, consensus, data availability, and settlement. Today, that monolithic model is being broken down into specialized layers—a trend popularized by Celestia’s introduction of modular architecture and the concept of dedicated data availability layers.
What was once a novel idea has now become mainstream. We’re seeing an explosion of Rollup-as-a-Service (RaaS) platforms, where infrastructure providers offer turnkey rollup solutions. In fact, we've reached a point where infrastructure count exceeds both application and user numbers, signaling early-stage overbuild but also immense potential for innovation.
This deconstruction allows each layer to optimize independently:
- Execution Layer: Where transactions are processed.
- Data Availability Layer: Ensures transaction data is published and accessible.
- Settlement Layer: Finalizes transaction batches and resolves disputes.
Let’s dive into what’s new across each layer.
👉 Discover how leading platforms are supporting next-gen blockchain infrastructure
Execution Layer: The Rise of Parallel EVM
Performance remains a top bottleneck for EVM-based chains. The most significant advancement recently has been the emergence of parallel EVMs, which enable multiple transactions to be processed simultaneously—unlike traditional EVMs that process transactions sequentially.
Projects like Monad, Sei, and MegaETH are pioneering this space, with existing chains such as Fantom and Canto planning upgrades toward parallel execution models.
Two Approaches to Parallel Execution
- A Priori Parallelization (Solana, Sui)
Transactions must declare which parts of the state they will modify before execution. Conflicting transactions (e.g., two trades hitting the same AMM pool) are filtered out early. This prevents conflicts but requires upfront complexity from developers. - A Posteriori / Optimistic Parallelization (Sei, Aptos BlockSTM, Monad)
All transactions are accepted optimistically and executed in parallel. After execution, the system checks for conflicts. If detected, conflicting transactions are re-executed until consistency is achieved. This approach maximizes throughput under low contention.
While both methods improve performance, their real-world efficacy depends on network conditions and use case patterns.
Divergent Philosophies in Scaling Strategy
Some projects treat parallelization as their core scaling narrative:
- Monad combines optimistic parallel execution with a custom database (MonadDB) and async I/O optimizations.
- Sei focuses on order-matching parallelism for DeFi applications.
Others see it as one component of a broader strategy:
- Fantom emphasizes its Sonic upgrade—FVM + optimized Lachesis consensus.
- Solana bets on Firedancer, a new client with modular architecture and improved networking.
- MegaETH aims for “Realtime Blockchain” performance through holistic optimization across software, hardware, Merkle Trie structures, disk I/O, and network communication—all built atop Reth, a high-performance Ethereum client developed by Paradigm.
This multi-dimensional push is pushing the boundaries of what EVM can achieve.
Data Availability (DA) Layer: Beyond Celestia
The DA layer hasn’t seen radical technical breakthroughs lately, but adoption dynamics are shifting quickly.
Ethereum’s Blob Revolution
With the introduction of blobs via EIP-4844, Ethereum has become a far more affordable data availability layer for Layer2s. This upgrade drastically reduced rollup costs, making ETH a competitive DA option despite its high base fees.
Celestia: Defining the DA Category
Celestia didn’t invent new cryptography, but it created a market. By being the first to clearly articulate the DA layer concept, it lifted the sector’s perceived value from a $2B FDV to over $20B. Many new app-specific rollups now default to Celestia for DA.
Avail: A Stronger Celestia?
Polygon’s Avail positions itself as a “Celestia++,” leveraging Polkadot-inspired Grandpa+BABE consensus for better decentralization potential and supporting validity proofs—a feature Celestia lacks. However, Avail still lags in ecosystem momentum.
EigenDA Enters the Scene
Launched alongside EigenLayer’s mainnet, EigenDA leverages restaking for security. Given EigenLayer’s strong partnerships and narrative power, EigenDA is likely to gain rapid adoption—especially among teams prioritizing cost and perceived security over technical nuances like fraud vs. validity proofs.
Notable Alternative DA Solutions
- Near DA
Originally built for sharding, Near now offers cheap DA with fast settlement. It also introduced chain abstraction via NEAR accounts that can sign cross-chain transactions—a UX leap forward. - Bitcoin & CKB as DA
Most BTC L2s use Bitcoin as a DA layer by posting ZK proof hashes (or full proofs) to Bitcoin via OP_RETURN or inscription mechanisms.
An innovative alternative is CKB’s RGB++, where CKB acts as DA and BTC serves as settlement due to UTXO-based asset binding. Emerging DA Innovations
- Combining DA with AI: Using DA layers to store AI model training data and trajectories.
- Improved erasure coding: Enhancing network resilience in dynamic environments with frequent node dropouts.
👉 Explore how emerging blockchains are integrating advanced data availability models
Settlement Layer: Challenging Ethereum’s Dominance
For years, Ethereum has been the de facto settlement layer for ZK rollups. But this monopoly is starting to crack.
Why Challenge ETH’s Settlement Role?
Two major issues hinder Ethereum as a ZK verification platform:
- Technical Limitations
Verifying ZK proofs on Ethereum requires complex Solidity contracts that implement cryptographic primitives (e.g., elliptic curve operations). The EVM isn’t optimized for this workload, increasing development cost and limiting compatibility with ZK-native languages like Noir, Leo, or Lurk. - High & Volatile Costs
Even though DA fees dominate rollup costs, ZK verification still incurs gas expenses. On Ethereum, these can spike unpredictably—making it expensive and unreliable for time-sensitive applications.
Enter: Dedicated ZK Settlement Layers
New projects like Nebra, and pivoting veterans like Mina and Zen, are building specialized settlement layers designed specifically for ZK proof verification.
Key features include:
- Native support for multiple ZK languages
- Proof aggregation for lower costs
- Faster finality
- Integration with decentralized proof markets
There’s growing synergy between settlement layers and proof markets. Future ecosystems may see:
- Settlement layers launching their own proof networks
- Proof market operators building verticalized settlement stacks
Ultimately, the market will decide whether specialized ZK settlement layers can outperform Ethereum’s established position.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: What is modular blockchain architecture?
A: It’s a design that splits blockchain functions—execution, consensus, data availability, and settlement—into independent layers, allowing each to scale and innovate separately.
Q: Why is parallel EVM important?
A: It enables higher throughput by processing multiple transactions simultaneously, addressing a key bottleneck in traditional EVM chains that process transactions one at a time.
Q: How did Ethereum improve its data availability?
A: Through EIP-4844 (proto-danksharding), which introduced blob-carrying transactions—lowering data publishing costs for Layer2 rollups.
Q: Can Bitcoin be used as a data availability layer?
A: Yes—many Bitcoin L2s store ZK proof hashes or full proofs on-chain using mechanisms like OP_RETURN or Taproot Assets.
Q: What makes EigenDA different from Celestia?
A: EigenDA uses Ethereum restaking (via EigenLayer) for security, offering faster confirmation times and tighter integration with Ethereum’s trust layer.
Q: Are new settlement layers replacing Ethereum?
A: Not yet—but they’re creating competition by offering cheaper, faster, and more specialized ZK proof verification environments.
👉 Stay ahead with cutting-edge insights on blockchain infrastructure evolution
Final Thoughts
While AI captures headlines and Bitcoin dominates conversations, the real foundation of Web3’s future lies in infrastructure innovation. From parallel EVMs pushing performance limits to modular DA and emerging ZK settlement layers challenging Ethereum’s dominance—the public chain ecosystem is undergoing a quiet revolution.
These developments aren’t flashy, but they’re fundamental. They’ll determine which chains can scale securely, support complex applications, and deliver seamless user experiences in the years ahead.
As we move into 2025 and beyond, watch closely: the next wave of crypto adoption won’t come from hype alone—it’ll be powered by better infrastructure.