Does a public blockchain really need to do everything on its own?
Executing transactions, processing smart contracts, reaching consensus, making data available, and providing final settlement — early blockchains typically sought to handle all of these core functions within a single network.
But as Web3 users, applications, and transaction volumes continue to grow, one question has become increasingly difficult to ignore: If every task must be handled by the same chain, how large can a public blockchain really scale?
From the rise of Rollups to Data Availability (DA) emerging as specialized infrastructure, and now to increasingly mature Modular Stacks, the evolution of blockchain infrastructure over the past few years has largely been an attempt to answer this question.
And the answer is beginning to change: Perhaps a blockchain does not need to do everything on its own.
I. Why Are Public Blockchains Becoming Modular?
A traditional Monolithic Blockchain typically relies on a single network to handle several core functions: Execution → Settlement → Consensus → Data Availability
This architecture is straightforward and self-contained. But as networks scale, concentrating all of these responsibilities on one chain creates increasing pressure:
- More users and transactions: Networks must process greater computational and data workloads.
- Higher throughput: This often requires greater hardware performance and bandwidth from nodes.
- Lower Gas costs: Networks must continuously improve processing efficiency.
- More complex applications: Gaming, DeFi, RWA, and other use cases have increasingly different performance requirements.
This brings a long-standing challenge for public blockchains into focus: How can Scalability, Security, and Decentralization be better balanced?
The rise of Rollups introduced another approach.
Large volumes of transactions can be executed on Layer 2, with results and relevant data then submitted to the underlying network. Ethereum has also progressively adopted a Rollup-centric scaling roadmap.
The most important change is not simply the addition of another Layer 2. It is the growing acceptance of a different architectural idea: If one chain cannot optimize everything at once, different layers can specialize in different tasks.
This is how modularity began moving into the mainstream of public blockchain development.
II. From Rollups to Modular Stacks: How Blockchains Were Gradually “Unbundled”
Modularity did not emerge overnight.
Looking back at the technological evolution of recent years, public blockchains have gone through a gradual process of decoupling.
1. Rollups: Execution Was the First Layer to Be Separated
Optimistic Rollups, ZK Rollups, and similar solutions moved large volumes of transaction execution away from Layer 1, allowing the underlying network to focus more on Settlement, Security, and Data Availability.
This demonstrated something fundamental: Different blockchain functions do not necessarily have to be performed by the same layer.
Public blockchains began moving from: Monolithic → Layered
2. DA: Infrastructure Became More Specialized
Once Execution was separated, the next question naturally followed: If Execution can be specialized, why not Data Availability?
Ethereum has continued to expand its DA capabilities through technologies such as Blobs and PeerDAS, while networks such as Celestia have developed Data Availability into specialized infrastructure of its own.
As a result, modularity began moving beyond a simple L1 + L2 architecture: Layered → Modular
3. Modular Stacks: From “Choosing a Chain” to “Composing a Chain”
As Execution, DA, Settlement, and Consensus become increasingly decoupled, modularity is no longer only about scaling.
The question developers face is also changing:
Before: Which blockchain should I build on?
Now: What kind of blockchain do I need?
Execution, DA, Settlement, Governance, Interoperability, and other capabilities can increasingly be combined according to the needs of specific applications.
Modularity is therefore undergoing a more fundamental transition: From a Scaling Solution to a Blockchain Infrastructure Paradigm.
III. Modularity Is Changing More Than Just TPS
If modularity were only about processing more transactions, it would simply be another scaling technology. But as Modular Stacks mature, they are beginning to change how developers build blockchain infrastructure.
This shift is taking place in three major ways:
From “one chain does everything” to specialized modules Execution, DA, Settlement, and other infrastructure layers can continuously optimize around their core functions without requiring a single network to handle everything.
From “applications adapt to blockchains” to “infrastructure adapts to applications” Gaming, DeFi, payments, RWA, AI, and other use cases can select infrastructure combinations that better match their performance, security, and business requirements.
From “Chain vs. Chain” to “Stack vs. Stack” Developers may increasingly compare not just individual Layer 1 networks, but entire combinations of Execution, Settlement, DA, Consensus, and Interoperability — and which Stack delivers the best balance of performance, cost, security, and developer experience.
The deeper impact of modularity, therefore, is that public blockchains are gradually evolving from relatively fixed “products” into composable, scalable, and customizable infrastructure.
IV. 2026: After Unbundling, How Do We Reconnect?
Modularity has helped address part of the blockchain scaling challenge, but it has also introduced a new tension: There are more networks — and they are becoming increasingly fragmented.
As Rollups, Appchains, and independent execution environments continue to multiply, users, assets, liquidity, and applications can become distributed across different networks.
The industry is therefore moving from asking: How do we unbundle the blockchain?
to asking: How do we reconnect modular blockchains?
This is why Interoperability, Cross-Chain Messaging, Shared Liquidity, Chain Abstraction, and related technologies are becoming increasingly important components of modular infrastructure.
The broader evolution is becoming clearer: Monolithic → Layered → Modular → Specialized → Interconnected
If the first phase of modularity was about “unbundling” the blockchain so that different modules could specialize, the next phase is about: reconnecting specialized modules, Rollups, and independent networks.
That is why the key themes for modular public blockchains in 2026 extend beyond Modularity itself to three defining characteristics: Modular · Specialized · Interoperable
V. Meta Earth: From a Modular Public Blockchain to a Scalable Multidimensional Network
This broader industry evolution also aligns with Meta Earth’s long-term vision for ME Network.
ME Network is not focused solely on how many transactions a single Layer 1 can process. Instead, through a layered modular architecture, it aims to establish clearer specialization across different network capabilities:
- Execution: Supports high-performance transaction execution and Rollup scaling.
- Settlement: Handles state confirmation and network settlement.
- Data Availability & Consensus: Provides the foundation for network data availability and underlying security.
- Interoperability: Connects different Rollups, applications, and external blockchain networks.
Building on this foundation, ME-Rollup SDK can provide more flexible scaling environments for different applications and business scenarios, while cross-chain infrastructure enables assets and value to move across different networks.
Meta Earth’s vision for modular public blockchains, therefore, is not simply about: splitting one blockchain into more layers.
The broader goal is to build: blockchain infrastructure that can scale modularly, compose capabilities on demand, support different Rollups and applications, and maintain value connectivity across multiple networks.
The blockchain of the future may no longer require a single public chain to carry an entire ecosystem.
Instead, it may look more like an ever-expanding network: Base Network Capabilities → Specialized Rollup Execution → Real Application Use Cases → Interoperability Connecting Networks and Value
From Monolithic to Modular, the challenge is how to scale.
From Modular to Interconnected, the challenge becomes how to remain connected after scaling.
A multidimensional network that can continuously expand while keeping users, applications, and value connected is the modular blockchain future that Meta Earth aims to continue exploring through ME Network.
Top comments (0)