A narrow question for token holders

Starknet’s community forum published a non-binding governance proposal on October 15 asking whether the network should research becoming an independent post-quantum Layer 1. The seven-day poll offers support for further research, opposition or a neutral response seeking more information. A positive result would begin research leading to more detailed proposals and additional polls.

The proposal identifies dependencies on Ethereum, including the bridge and data availability, as its security motivation. It says STRK would remain the token and bridges from Ethereum would remain open. No transition timetable is established. The vote therefore concerns a research direction, rather than approval to move the network or issue a replacement token.

Security extends across dependencies

A blockchain can control some parts of its design while relying on another system for others. Improving the components it operates directly does not automatically change those external dependencies. That makes upgrade coordination part of a wider security discussion, alongside the properties of individual cryptographic tools.

Our interpretation is that the proposal turns this architectural question into a governance process. An independent network might gain more control over its upgrade decisions, but independence would also require its own operational and security arrangements. Those trade-offs need concrete research before a community can evaluate a transition responsibly.

Research approval is not implementation approval

Governance headlines can compress several stages into one. A poll can establish interest, a technical proposal can define an approach, and a later decision can authorize implementation. Treating the first stage as the final decision gives readers an inaccurate picture of what has actually changed.

The same care applies to claims about quantum readiness. A security argument needs to identify the particular components and assumptions being discussed. A broad label is less informative than an account of the remaining dependencies, the proposed mitigations and the evidence supporting them.

The next milestone is the close of the poll and the response appropriate to its result. If research proceeds, detailed designs and further community decisions will provide the basis for evaluating any migration. In the meantime, the concrete news is that Starknet has opened a formal discussion about its future architecture. The current proposal preserves several stated commitments while asking whether the community wants a more thoroughly researched alternative to its existing Layer 2 path.

Source: https://community.starknet.io/t/should-starknet-become-an-independent-post-quantum-l1/116392