The system structure of Linea consists of three main governance and operational tiers: the execution layer, the proof layer, and the protocol governance layer. These three tiers jointly constitute the source of Linea's long-term stability, with the key being very clear boundaries of authority, preventing governance complexity from spiraling out of control as the scale expands.
In the execution layer, the Sequencer undertakes transaction ordering and block construction functions. At this stage, for efficiency, a centralized orderer is used, but the roadmap clearly indicates that the ordering rights will gradually be decentralized to multiple nodes in the future. The autonomy of the ordering layer is not a one-time delegation of power, but rather a phased advancement: starting from permissioned nodes and gradually opening up to a permissionless ordering network. This 'gradual decentralization' can avoid instability in the execution layer in the early stages due to uneven node quality, while laying the foundation for long-term resistance to censorship.
In the proof layer, Linea's zkEVM is the core of the entire governance structure. The proof system does not accept human intervention; it automatically generates proofs based on execution trajectories, the Aggregator is responsible for compression, and then Ethereum verifies it. This structure naturally structures verification authority as 'math-dominated' rather than 'node-dominated'. The governance layer does not change proof rules but adjusts circuit versions, verification cost models, and aggregation batch logic through parameterization. The high degree of autonomy in the proof layer keeps collaboration costs low and prevents governance from getting caught in frequent interventions of micro parameters.
The protocol governance layer is responsible for structural specifications but not for execution details. The content formulated by the governance layer includes the decentralization route of the Sequencer, the upgrade process of verification parameters, DA submission rules, oracle compliance, and the revenue distribution model of the protocol. The principle of convergence for the boundaries of governance is very clear: governance does not participate in executing sorting, does not participate in proof generation, and does not participate in the operation of individual contracts, but is responsible for the rules of the system mechanism itself.
This governance convergence allows Linea to maintain stability during scale growth. The more applications, users, and on-chain load, the complexity of governance does not increase linearly, because governance does not need to manage every subsystem, but only needs to maintain the stability of structural rules.
The risk structure is also disaggregated by layers. The risk of the execution layer comes from the sequencers, but the permissions of the sorting layer are limited and do not participate in state verification, so they do not threaten the entire system. The proof layer bears the verification responsibility; as long as the zk proof is correct, the risks of the execution layer are isolated. The data layer is responsible for DA, so state recoverability and finality are provided by Layer1, possessing the highest level of fault tolerance. Governance layer risks come from parameter changes, but all parameter changes have delay mechanisms, on-chain transparent records, and multi-stage proposal processes, making risks controllable.
Line's coordination mechanism relies on a 'cross-layer verification path'. The execution layer submits batches of transactions, the proof layer generates proofs, the Aggregator aggregates, and finally submits to Ethereum for verification. If there is an anomaly in the execution layer (for example, if the sequencer does not package according to the rules), the proof layer will reject generating proofs due to inconsistent trajectories. The proof layer acts as a natural reviewer of the execution layer, and governance does not need to intervene in coordination. This hierarchical error correction structure gives the system self-stability.
In terms of protocol upgrades, Linea has adopted a rigorous progressive upgrade mechanism. Any changes to the zkEVM circuits, Aggregator logic, or Sequencer rules must first be simulated in a testing environment, verified in a secondary network, and only then submitted to mainnet governance. The upgrade process does not force a single point of replacement but gradually enables multiple batches to prevent verification or execution failures due to version switching. This engineering upgrade process is key to ensuring the long-term stability of zkEVM.
The economic structure is closely tied to the governance structure. Linea's fee distribution model revolves around two main lines: execution costs and proof costs. Sequencers receive part of the execution revenue, proof providers receive part of the proof subsidies, and the protocol fund is responsible for long-term support of circuit upgrades and system expansion. The voting rights of governance participants are designed to have decentralized weights, not solely determined by the number of tokens, but also combined with staking duration, participation history, and verification contributions, aligning governance participants' interests with system security.
In terms of ecological expansion, Linea's zkEVM provides consistent verification security, allowing applications such as DeFi, data computation, and identity systems to run under the same verification standard. This unity reduces cross-application risks and eliminates the need for governance to set special cases for specific domains. The larger the ecosystem, the more stable the structure, resulting in lower governance costs, which is a kind of 'reverse complexity' that Linea's engineering design deliberately pursues.
Overall, Linea's governance philosophy is not about 'expanding governance' but 'reducing governance', bringing the system into a state that is structurally predictable, parameter manageable, and verifiably reproducible. Execution layering, proof layering, and governance layering prevent risks from concentrating; parameterized governance, progressive upgrades, and phased decentralization ensure that the system does not lose stability due to scale growth.
The value of Linea is not only to expand Ethereum but to make scalability a sustainable engineering system in the long term.
