Розуміння плазмових та PoS мостів у полігоні Етереума

Question

Що таке плазмовий міст і чим він відрізняється від моделей PoS і burn/mint для мосту Ethereum до Polygon?

jonamith · Answer

PoS and Burn and Mint are considered the same model, and the current bridging transactions largely use these methods instead of Plasma.

Lently · Answer

The plasma bridge was an earlier bridging process when Polygon was known as the MATIC network. Its mainly phased out now because Plasma is costly and not commonly used anymore.

The Web3 Diva · Answer

Currently, Polygon uses a Burn and Mint bridging model, where tokens are burned on the origination chain and re-minted on the destination chain, maintaining a constant cross-chain supply.

Chim · Answer

The Ethereum contract 0x401F6c983eA34274ec46f84D70b31C151321188b, labeled as plasma bridge, is still used in some cases, but generally, its not associated with the contemporary Plasma model due to the evolution of sidechains and L2 solutions.

0xae84...9d4b · Answer

The Plasma Bridge is a mechanism used to transfer assets between the Ethereum mainnet and the Polygon network, leveraging Plasma technology. This technology enhances security by utilizing the Ethereum main chains security features, making it suitable for applications that require high trust levels, such as financial services. The Plasma Bridge allows for the transfer of native tokens like MATIC and certain Ethereum tokens (ETH, ERC-20, ERC-721) but has a longer withdrawal time of up to seven days when moving assets back to Ethereum. This bridge works in two ways: Asset Transfer: When tokens are transferred from Ethereum to Polygon, they are locked on the Ethereum side while an equivalent amount of tokens is minted on Polygon. Withdrawal Process: To withdraw assets back to Ethereum, users must initiate a process that includes a challenge period where transactions can be contested, enhancing security but also extending the time required for completion. Comparison with PoS and Burn/Mint Models The Proof of Stake (PoS) Bridge and the Burn and Mint model are alternative mechanisms for bridging assets between Ethereum and Polygon. Here’s how they differ: | Feature | Plasma Bridge | PoS Bridge | Burn and Mint Model | |-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | Security Model | Inherits security from Ethereum | Uses validators and staked MATIC | Tokens are burned on the origin chain and re-minted on the destination chain | | Withdrawal Time | Up to 7 days | 45 minutes to 3 hours | Instant for deposits; variable for withdrawals | | Supported Tokens | ETH, ERC-20, ERC-721 | ETH, ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155 | Generally supports all tokens through burning and minting | | Transaction Costs | Higher due to security measures | Lower costs, optimized for speed | Variable based on gas fees during burn/mint | | Usage Popularity | Less common in current transactions | Widely used for most bridging transactions | Increasingly adopted due to efficiency |

0x4a19...e1b5 · Answer

A Plasma Bridge was an early method for transferring assets between Ethereum and Polygon (formerly the MATIC Network). It was based on Plasma, a scaling framework designed to improve security by relying on Ethereum’s mainnet for fraud-proof verification. The Plasma Bridge required a 7-day withdrawal period, making it slower and less practical compared to modern alternatives. Over time, Polygon moved away from Plasma bridging, as it was costly and inefficient for most users. Today, bridging transactions primarily use the PoS (Proof-of-Stake) and Burn/Mint models, which are considered the same mechanism. These models provide a faster and more seamless way to move assets across chains. PoS and Burn/Mint Model (The Current Standard) Currently, Polygon’s primary bridging method follows a Burn and Mint process, where: Tokens are burned on the source chain (Ethereum). The transaction is verified via the PoS network. Equivalent tokens are minted on Polygon, maintaining a constant supply. This model is preferred because it eliminates the long withdrawal times associated with Plasma and allows for faster exits with minimal friction. Is the Plasma Bridge Still in Use? While the Plasma Bridge still exists, it’s largely phased out. Some legacy contracts, such as Ethereum contract 0x401F6c983eA34274ec46f84D70b31C151321188b, are labeled as “Plasma Bridge,” but they no longer follow the original Plasma model due to advancements in sidechains and Layer 2 solutions. Key Differences Plasma Bridge: More secure but slower (7-day withdrawals). PoS/Burn-Mint Model: Faster, widely used, and relies on Polygon’s security mechanisms rather than Ethereum fraud proofs. Unless you specifically need to use a Plasma-based bridge, the PoS and Burn/Mint models are the recommended methods for bridging between Ethereum and Polygon today. Would you like guidance on how to bridge assets using the current system?

Характеристика	Плазмовий міст	Міст PoS	Модель Burn and Mint
Модель безпеки	Успадковує безпеку від Ethereum	Використовує валідатори та стейк MATIC	Токени спалюються на ланцюжку походження та повторно карбуються в ланцюжку призначення
Час виведення	До 7 днів	45 хвилин до 3 годин	Миттєво для депозитів; змінна для зняття коштів
Підтримувані токени	ETH, ERC-20, ERC-721	ETH, ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155	Як правило, підтримує всі токени шляхом спалювання та карбування
Вартість транзакції	Вища завдяки заходам безпеки	Менші витрати, оптимізовані для швидкості	Змінна на основі плати за газ під час спалювання/монети
Популярність використання	Менш поширений у поточних транзакціях	Широко використовується для більшості мостових транзакцій	Все частіше приймається завдяки ефективності

Розуміння плазмових та PoS мостів у полігоні Етереума

Відповіді

Порівняння з моделями PoS та Burn/Mint

Ви знаєте відповідь?

Зароби свою частку з 1000 Sui