Ethereum L1 and Base disagree on account abstraction standards after negotiations failed

Ethereum L1 and Base diverge on account abstraction standards

According to Ethlabs researcher Derek Chiang, Ethereum L1 and Coinbase's well-known Layer 2 network Base have terminated cooperation, and the two parties have failed to reach a consensus on establishing a unified Account Abstraction standard. The decision came after a joint effort failed last week, and the two chains are currently advancing their respective technical proposals: Base adopts EIP-8130, while Ethereum L1 launches EIP-8141 known as Frame Transactions.

Differences in account abstraction standards

The developers of the two networks originally aimed to develop sharing agreements for functions such as gas-free transactions and passkey wallets. Although some consensus was reached in the early stages, as the differences in their priorities gradually widened, maintaining a single standard became impractical. Ethereum L1 focuses on the neutrality, privacy protection and long-term security of its settlement layer, while Base emphasizes compliance, scalability and configurability to adapt to commercial and enterprise-level application scenarios.

Derek Chiang said engineers from both sides spent weeks reviewing various technology options. However, each path requires one party to make major adjustments to its core goals, which ultimately are not accepted by either party. Therefore, both projects chose to pursue independent technical solutions.

Regarding the technical disagreement between Ethereum L1 and Base on account abstraction, Chiang described it as a foreseeable result. He publicly confirmed the split, writing that the two networks "will now take different paths to implement different AA standards."

Previously, Base and Ethereum developers relied on sharing standards such as EOA accounts and EIP-1559 transactions to allow wallets and applications to run seamlessly on both platforms. However, as the requirements for compliance, scalability and security evolve, the gap between the two parties is widening, making it impractical to continue cooperation at this stage.

Technical and development implications

Ethereum L1 's new proposal focuses on transaction formats that support post-quantum signature aggregation. These technical requirements form the basis for standards such as ERC-4337, EIP-7701, and more recently the draft EIP-8141 Frame Transactions. Developers are promoting account models that can be scaled without chain-level licensing, which is consistent with the decentralized values at the core of Ethereum.

In contrast, Base requires a technical architecture that can efficiently scale and support programmable compliance controls. The approach is reflected in the independent Tempo Transactions standard and EIP-8130, both tailored for high-throughput enterprise environments. Base's need to clearly distinguish between allowed and restricted operations further influenced its design choices.

This separation means wallet providers and application builders now face greater challenges in bridging fragmented account abstraction standards. Although users may not be directly aware of these underlying differences if the Wallet team succeeds in simplifying the user experience, the development workload will increase.

Chiang acknowledged that this brought new complexity to the development team, but emphasized that clearly defined, chain-specific priorities were necessary for technological progress. He believes that given the current situation, it is a better path for each network to continue moving forward according to its own standards.

Micro Dictionary: Account abstraction

Account abstraction is a blockchain concept that allows accounts controlled by smart contracts to function like externally owned accounts (EOA). This enhances programmability and enables functions such as meta-transactions, pass-key wallets, and advanced user authentication.

Outlook on wallets and cross-chain compatibility

Looking forward, Chiang outlines two main paths for the ecosystem. The first is to create a new coordination process that invites a wider range of network stakeholders to participate, especially those building applications on Layer 2. Currently, most technical decisions are still focused on the All Core Devs (ACD) process for Ethereum client developers.

Another option is to accept continued fragmentation and focus on developing wallets that can manage multiple transaction standards across chains. The solution aims to free end users from complexity by handling integration work within the wallet application.

Reflecting on these two options, Chiang expressed his preference for giving more power to the Wallet team. He believes that the ability to adapt to evolving standards across networks may give wallet developers a competitive advantage. This approach may promote continued growth and innovation even as agreements gradually diverge.

Chiang pointed out that the split has shifted additional responsibilities to app and wallet developers, but he believes capable teams can successfully address these evolving challenges as each chain continues to innovate independently.

Coordination between Ethereum L1 and Base may still continue in certain areas where no one party requires compromise on core priorities. Precedents in Ethereum's history show that ecosystems can strike a balance between independent innovation and shared infrastructure. The evolution of proposals such as EIP-8130 and EIP-8141 and their impact on wallet interoperability and cross-chain user experience deserve close attention.