The Ethereum Foundation’s Protocol Cluster has released its inaugural unified tier list for the upcoming Hegot protocol upgrade, a significant step towards transparent prioritization of Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs). This comprehensive assessment evaluates 62 EIPs, assigning each a tier and a concise justification, marking a departure from previous team-specific opinions to a consolidated view. The document, detailing the collective judgment of approximately 60 researchers and engineers across the Protocol cluster, aims to provide the community with a clear understanding of the development priorities for the next major network upgrade.
The publication of this unified tier list represents a pivotal moment in the EIP selection process. Historically, individual client teams, such as Geth, have published their own prioritization lists. However, for Hegot, the Protocol cluster has collaborated to produce a single, overarching perspective. While Geth will still issue its own standalone tier list, this new collective document incorporates feedback from all participating teams and individual contributors, offering a more holistic view of the ecosystem’s consensus on proposed changes. The underlying priorities that shaped these tiered assessments are further elaborated in a companion post titled "EF Protocol: Current and Emerging Priorities."
I. The Rigorous Tiering Process
The methodology behind this tier list involved a multi-faceted approach to ensure comprehensive and informed decision-making. Nine distinct teams within the Protocol cluster, augmented by several individual domain experts, contributed to the evaluation. A total of 16 contribution templates were filled out, with 12 contributors providing tier grades for the proposed EIPs. Notably, several contributors focused their grading on EIPs where they possessed deep technical expertise, leading to an aggregate of 397 tier grades across the 62 evaluated EIPs. This resulted in an average of 6.4 grades per EIP, with the most debated proposals attracting as many as nine individual assessments.
Lessons learned from previous protocol upgrade retrospectives, such as those held in Glamsterdam, significantly influenced the tiering process. Key takeaways included the importance of sizing EIPs by their integration depth, understanding how complexity compounds, recognizing testing surface as a scarce resource, and acknowledging that champions often underestimate the inherent complexity of proposed changes. To address areas of contention and refine the grades, the cluster convened several group calls and dedicated a 90-minute working session to deliberate on disputed EIPs. Further details on the procedural aspects of this selection process were shared in an August 28th post, outlining the rigorous steps taken to reach consensus.
The Scoring Mechanism
The scoring system assigned numerical values to each tier: S (4 points), A (3 points), B (2 points), C (1 point), and D/DFI (0 points). The final tier for each EIP is derived from the average of the cast grades, with abstentions not counting against a proposal. The published tier represents a "steeldog" of the grades, meaning it is the most robust interpretation of the submitted scores, and was further refined through EIP-by-EIP arguments during the working session, allowing for adjustments in both directions. Per-team grades are not publicly disclosed to maintain the focus on the collective consensus.
Each tier level carries specific implications for delivery expectations within the cluster:
- S-Tier (Must Ship): These EIPs are considered essential for the Hegot upgrade and are slated for immediate implementation.
- A-Tier (Expected to Ship): These EIPs are highly likely to be included, contingent on continued progress and no unforeseen blockers.
- B-Tier (On the Bubble): EIPs in this tier require specific conditions or further development to be considered for inclusion. The notes accompanying these EIPs detail the precise requirements needed for them to ascend to the A-tier.
- C-Tier (Below the Line): These EIPs are not prioritized for the current upgrade but may be reconsidered in the future. The notes focus on the concerns that led to their lower ranking.
- DFI (Declined/Further Investigation): EIPs in this category are not being pursued for Hegot due to significant concerns or a lack of immediate necessity. The notes provide the specific reasons for their rejection.
The notes column in the accompanying tables adheres to a strict pattern: for EIPs expected to ship, it highlights their merits. For those on the bubble, it specifies the requirements for a tier upgrade. For declined EIPs, it solely outlines the concerns.
II. The Tier List: Consensus and Execution Layers
The full, interactive tier list is accessible on Forkcast, providing a visual representation of the evaluated EIPs. The tables presented in this article are sorted by tier and then by average score within each tier, with the grade count beside each average offering insight into the level of consensus.
Consensus Layer
The Consensus Layer (CL) EIPs are crucial for the fundamental operation and security of the Ethereum network. Among these, EIP-7805 (FOCIL) has been designated as an "S-Tier" headliner, signifying its mandatory inclusion. FOCIL aims to provide any user with a direct path to include an eligible transaction without reliance on centralized builders, a critical feature for enhancing decentralization and censorship resistance. Its unanimous S-tier rating across all participating evaluators underscores its importance. This EIP is expected to ship alongside EIP-8369 (VOPS Profiles for FOCIL Eligibility), which defines the criteria for transaction eligibility and validator verification, extending FOCIL’s inclusion guarantees to the Frames ecosystem.
Several EIPs have achieved "A-Tier" status, indicating strong support for their inclusion. EIP-8015 (Remove Deposit and eth1data Fields), a cleanup EIP that removes obsolete data fields, received near-unanimous backing. EIP-8365 (BLS Withdrawal Credential Retirement) is also an A-tier proposal, marking a crucial step in retiring withdrawal credentials tied to vulnerable cryptography. EIP-8383 (Reduce CL Block Retention Window), a constant change addressing an incorrectly chosen safety-decay constant, and EIP-8334 (Bundled Attestation Propagation), which aims to reduce gossip load by bundling attestations, are also in the A-tier, with the latter showing no grades below B, suggesting broad agreement on its mechanics. EIP-8025 (Optional Execution Proofs), which upstream stateless-execution changes, is another A-tier candidate.
The "B-Tier" category features EIPs that are strong contenders but require further refinement or resolution of specific conditions. EIP-8146 (Block Access List Sidecars) is in this tier, with its payload remaining independent of the Block Access List (BAL) for execution, and its deadline being observation-only and tunable. The primary remaining task is settling the observation deadline in the specification, which could elevate it to A-tier. EIP-8237 (Independent CL/EL Sync), aiming to halve sync bandwidth by leveraging post-ePBS changes, is also B-tier. The engineering teams noted that a simpler, non-EIP alternative might achieve similar benefits, requiring a comparison to determine the optimal path forward. EIP-8198 (Quick Slots), which proposes changes to slot times, received mixed reviews, with R&D favoring it while Engineering teams expressed concerns about retuning cascades. Its advancement to A-tier requires detailed specifications, a prototype, an in-depth downstream impact assessment, and sign-off on its compatibility with decoupled consensus. EIP-8321 (Hash-Chain RANDAO) is B-tier, deemed a sound direction but sequenced incorrectly, risking rework if implemented before a complete post-quantum (PQ) consensus design. It will move forward when the complete design is finalized and either adopts or extends it.
In the "C-Tier," EIP-8371 (RowDAS: Distributed Blob Reconstruction) is positioned, with its priority being a matter of operator pain points versus investing in future headroom.
The "DFI" (Declined/Further Investigation) category includes EIPs not slated for Hegot. EIP-7716 (Anti-Correlation Attestation Penalties), while a good idea, requires more research into its impact on the staker landscape and centralization forces, and is not a high priority for a fork focused on keeping CL scope light. EIP-8367 (Balance Sunset for Retired BLS Validators) and EIP-8321 are tied to the complete PQ consensus design and will be addressed later. EIP-8243 (Batching Attestations at Source) and EIP-8333 (Align Checkpoint with Epoch Boundary Block) are deferred due to their interaction with decoupled consensus. Several other EIPs, including EIP-8142 (Block-in-Blobs), EIP-8148 (Custom Sweep Threshold), EIP-8205 (Withdrawal Credentials Preregistration), EIP-8359 (Beacon Block Reporting Field), EIP-8375 (ePBS Mandatory Burn), EIP-8341 (Partial Execution Payload Commitments), and EIP-8363 (Tapered Issuance Burn), were unanimously declined due to dependency on broader ecosystem processes or lack of immediate necessity for the current fork.
Execution Layer
The Execution Layer (EL) EIPs are equally critical, focusing on enhancing the EVM’s functionality, security, and efficiency. EIP-8141 (Frame Transactions) has been declared the primary "S-Tier" headliner for the EL. Frame Transactions represent a significant advancement in native account abstraction, addressing security concerns by providing a path to PQ signature schemes without requiring a fork for each new scheme. It also enables signature aggregation for more efficient PQ verification and offers a route to retiring the vulnerable k1 keys. This EIP is slated to ship alongside EIP-8250 (Keyed Nonces for Frame Transactions) and EIP-8272 (Recent Roots for Frame Transactions), which are integral components of the Frame ecosystem.
Several A-tier EIPs are set to bolster the EL. EIP-3298 (Removal of Refunds) addresses a critical need by deleting an entire class of metering edge cases that caused significant issues in previous forks. EIP-8250 (Keyed Nonces for Frame Transactions), as mentioned, is core to the Frame architecture, allowing multiple users to share a sender for enhanced anonymity while using distinct nonces, thereby preventing transaction blockages. EIP-5920 (PAY Opcode) introduces a small but impactful feature for value transfer without invoking recipient code, closing a long-standing EVM gap. EIP-8272 (Recent Roots for Frame Transactions) allows private transactions to leverage recent on-chain state for verification, enabling them to benefit from FOCIL’s inclusion guarantees.
EIP-8279 (Block Access List Byte Floor) and EIP-8131 (Unified Transaction Content Floor) are paired A-tier proposals focused on security and repricing. EIP-8279 bounds worst-case block construction by flooring adversarial BAL pricing, while EIP-8131 applies a similar principle to calldata content. Their classification as security work is consistent, regardless of whether they are defined as bounding or repricing. EIP-7906 (Transaction Assertions via State Diff Opcode), an extension for Frames, enables transactions to verify prior state changes, preventing common exploits. Its proposed narrowing to focus on arbitrary storage reads and assertions over emitted events and BAL-touched slots retains its core value. EIP-8298 (SETCODEFROM Code Reuse Instruction) and EIP-8151 (Account Code Restricted ecRecover) form a critical package for retiring k1 keys. EIP-8298 allows delegated accounts to become true smart contract accounts, while EIP-8151 restricts ecRecover-based authentication once real code exists at an address. EIP-4758 (Deactivate SELFDESTRUCT), despite its 1.5 average score, is A-tier due to its importance in removing a significant testing hazard and simplifying the EVM for future EIPs, with engineering teams acknowledging the long-term cost of maintaining the opcode.
In the B-tier, EIP-8253 (Bump Nonce of Zero-Nonce Storage Accounts) is highlighted for its potential to significantly simplify the trie migration process. The decision on its inclusion hinges on whether this simplification warrants an A-tier rating now or a B-tier rating until devnet sequencing confirms its feasibility. EIP-8077 (eth/XX: Announce Transactions with Nonce), addressing the need for richer announcements in the Frame-era mempool, could move to A-tier if its wire format is finalized within the EIP. EIP-8374 (Persist Warm Access Sets Across Reverts) and EIP-7709 (Read BLOCKHASH from Storage and Update Cost) are B-tier proposals with potential for A-tier inclusion if devnet sequencing proceeds smoothly and allows for their integration without schedule delays.
The C-tier includes EIP-7668 (Remove Bloom Filters), a cleanup EIP best sequenced with broader history and logs work. EIP-8200 (EVMification) and EIP-7666 (EVM-ify the Identity Precompile) are grouped, with EIP-8200 requiring thorough auditing of replacement bytecodes and EIP-7666 serving as its prerequisite. EIP-8358 (Net Gas Metering for Account Changes) is currently a tier apart from its counterpart, EIP-8374. EIP-8355 (ML-DSA Verification Precompiles) is C-tier, deemed premature standardization of a specific PQ verification scheme.
The DFI block for the EL contains a number of EIPs declined for various reasons. EIP-8163 (Reserve EXTENSION (0xae) Opcode) is declined as no committed consumer requires the opcode in this fork. EIP-7979 (Call and Return Opcodes for the EVM) and EIP-7923 (Linear, Page-Based Memory Costing), along with EIP-7973 (Warm Account Write Metering), are part of the repricing family and are deferred to avoid further metering churn before post-Glamsterdam mainnet data provides clarity. EIP-7851 (Code-Controlled EOA Delegation) and EIP-7819 (SETDELEGATE Instruction) are alternative account abstraction mechanics that lose out to the Frame approach on the permissionless innovation test. EIP-8304 (Trustless Log and Transaction Index), EIP-8094 (eth/vhash: Blob-Aware Mempool), EIP-8115 (Batch Priority Fees at End of Block), and EIP-8219 (Checked Arithmetic Opcodes) are EIPs that are either too broad in scope, have unclear interactions with existing paths, or are part of repricing families awaiting further data. EIP-8188 (Last-Written Block for Accounts and Slots) awaits the I* trie-migration design. EIP-2488 (Deprecate the CALLCODE Opcode) is a deprecation with no immediate urgency. EIP-7862 (Delayed State Root) is a deferred proving preparation set. EIP-8182 (Private ETH and ERC-20 Transfers) is declined in favor of the more flexible Frame-based approach. EIP-7645 (Alias ORIGIN to SENDER) is unanimously declined for breaking assumptions in deployed contracts without security gain. EIP-7807 (SSZ Execution Blocks) is a formatting migration with a wide blast radius and no Hegot dependency.
Two EIPs, EIP-8368 (CPSB Recalibration for New Gas Limit) and EIP-8372 (Normalized State Gas Limit), are marked "TBD," awaiting post-Glamsterdam mainnet data to inform decisions on recalibration, normalization, or other actions.
III. In Closing: A Deliberate Path Forward
The comprehensive evaluation of 62 proposals has resulted in a clear roadmap for the Hegot upgrade. Of these, two EIPs are designated as "must-ship" (S-Tier), 15 are expected to ship (A-Tier), and 28 have been declined with clearly articulated reasons. The remaining 15 proposals are categorized as B-tier (requiring specific conditions for inclusion), C-tier (below the current line of prioritization), or TBD (pending further data). This rigorous selection process emphasizes that success is measured not only by what is included but also by what is deliberately excluded to maintain focus and clarity.
For those seeking a deeper understanding of the strategic underpinnings of these decisions, the companion post, "EF Protocol: Current and Emerging Priorities," offers crucial insights into the cluster’s overarching goals, plans, and the commitments that informed every grade.
The Protocol Cluster actively encourages constructive feedback and debate regarding the published tier list. To facilitate this, a Reddit AMA (Ask Me Anything) session is scheduled for September 16th at 2:00 PM UTC on the r/ethereum subreddit. This forum will provide an opportunity for champions and supporters of EIPs that were not ranked in the A-tier or were declined to voice their perspectives and engage directly with the decision-makers. Questions can be submitted in advance via a dedicated form.
Editor’s Note: This article was updated on September 8, 2026, to revise the tier list notes for EIP-7716, providing additional clarification on areas requiring further research and discussion.
