ECIP (draft) - Elysium Basefee Split Routing#568
Open
GravityLabLLC wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
Conversation
15 tasks
This was referenced Mar 13, 2026
Member
|
This would be ECIP-1122, ECIP-1110 is active on mainnet |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds a new ECIP draft describing ECIP-1110-ELY-FEE, which proposes enabling EIP-1559 + EIP-3198 semantics on Ethereum Classic while routing BASEFEE to a deterministic Elysium revenue address (instead of burning it).
Changes:
- Introduces a new ECIP document outlining fee market activation and
BASEFEErouting. - Specifies the ETC-specific consensus modification to credit
BASEFEEtoELYSIUM_REVENUE_ADDRESS. - Adds initial sections for motivation, rationale, security considerations, and implementation notes.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
You can also share your feedback on Copilot code review. Take the survey.
| @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| ecip: 1110-ELY-FEE | |||
| ecip: 1110-ELY-FEE | ||
| title: Elysium Fee Market and Productive Revenue Routing | ||
| lang: en | ||
| author: Daniel Tocila |
Comment on lines
+8
to
+10
| category: Core | ||
| created: 2026-03-11 | ||
| license: Apache-2 |
Comment on lines
+5
to
+7
| author: Daniel Tocila | ||
| status: Draft | ||
| type: Standards Track |
| Informally, for each transaction $i$ in a block with gas used $g_i$ and block base fee $b$ (in wei per gas), define: | ||
|
|
||
| $$ | ||
| ext{basefee\_revenue} = \sum_i g_i \cdot b |
GravityLabLLC
changed the title
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Elysium Basefee Split Routing proposes activating EIP-1559 and EIP-3198 behavior on Ethereum Classic while routing consensus
BASEFEEto a deterministic Elysium revenue contract instead of burning it. The proposal preserves minerpriorityFee, keeps ETC issuance policy intact, and defines a narrow consensus-surface change focused on fee-market compatibility plus deterministic productive routing.This is part of the Elysium upgrade which is defined here in the Elysium Files:
https://logtrees.com/elysium/elysium.html
For broader Elysium discussion, see this discussion: https://github.com/orgs/ethereumclassic/discussions/571
You can also ask us questions in Discord and we will be on the Community Calls!
Front-Matter Checklist
Verify that your ECIP file's front-matter block contains all required fields per ECIP-1000:
ecip:—1110title:—Elysium Fee Market and Productive Revenue Routinglang:—enauthor:— Real name(s) and optionally email address or GitHub handlediscussions-to:— URL of the public discussion thread (Discord, GitHub issue, etc.)status:—Drafttype:—Standards Trackcategory:—Corecreated:—2026-03-12Section Checklist
Verify that your ECIP document contains all required sections:
### Abstract— Short (~200 word) description of the technical issue### Motivation— Why the existing protocol is inadequate### Specification— Precise technical specification of the proposed change### Rationale— Design decisions, alternatives considered, and community consensus### Implementation— Reference implementation or notes (currently captured via implementation status notes)### Copyright/Licensing— Explicit license terms (see ECIP-1000 for accepted licenses)