Infura post merge, from a staker perspective

A sizeable number of home / solo stakers are using Infura execution client (“eth1”) right now, either as their only execution client or as fallback. A smaller number are using the Infura consensus client (“eth2”, “beacon”).

The merge fundamentally changes what the execution client needs to do. “Proof of Custody” means that the execution client has to be under the control of the consensus/validator client. In addition, priority fees get paid out by the execution client, and there’s the question of MEV.

Is there anything Infura can share yet about plans post-merge?

  • Execution client suitable for PoC - I am assuming “no”. I don’t see a way to share the access across multiple users, and offering a dedicated client is so niche it likely doesn’t fall into your business model. Also quite expensive, it’d be easier to just rent IaaS and run it there, for users.

  • Consensus client (with execution client behind) suitable for connection by validator client, like the beta offering now: I can see that. In that case, however, how are priority fees and MEV on block proposal going to be handled? This may again not be core to Infura’s business model and fall away - it’d be cool to know.

  • RPC connection: Core to Infura’s business, and no changes there. This would work exactly the way it does now, just that the execution client (Geth) that offers the service would now be “docked” to a consensus client behind the scenes. Presumably Teku.

Hi @yorickdowne

Thank you for sharing this information with our Infura community. We are more than happy to answer these questions. I’ve raised this with our technical team and I kindly ask you to share with me your email address.

Thank you for your time. I hope to hear from you soon.

@Flaviu I am keen to discuss this because I am a community-minded person. For my own use, I am running redundant execution and consensus clients, but I am also an active member of the eth-staker community and care about home stakers.