How will Layer 1 launchpads such as KRON coexist with existing KRC-20 launchpads on Layer 2?
I have been researching the Kaspa ecosystem and noticed that several KRC-20 launchpads already exist on Layer 2 networks, while new projects such as KRON are building launchpad functionality directly on Layer 1.
From a technical perspective, what are the advantages and tradeoffs of each approach?
Are Layer 2 launchpads expected to continue serving a distinct purpose, or is the long-term expectation that Layer 1 launchpads will become the preferred architecture?
I'm interested in understanding the technical reasons behind these different designs rather than which project is "better."
Thank you.
1 answer
Kaspa allows for different development paths.
Before covenants, assets required an additional layer. KRC-20 is an indexer that observes Kaspa but enforces its own rules, so the asset state is not enforced directly by Kaspa consensus. The same applies to L2s such as Igra and Kasplex. They introduce another validation layer, and additional trust assumptions outside of Kaspa L1.
Post Toccata, assets can now be created whose rules and state transitions are enforced directly by Kaspa consensus.
The benefit of keeping assets on L1 is that they can compose and build together under the same consensus rules, without adding further trust layers between them.
The ecosystem is now working through how existing assets and applications can migrate toward L1, and how new projects can deploy directly on Kaspa.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads