Rollup ID

Overview

A rollup ID uniquely names a rollup within a registry, settlement protocol, bridge, or multi-rollup system. It prevents records intended for one instance from being interpreted as belonging to another. The identifier may be a numeric chain ID, a contract-derived value, a genesis hash, or another namespace-specific encoding. It is not universally standardized, and the same rollup can have different identifiers in wallets, bridge protocols, and deployment registries.

Software should obtain the expected ID from authoritative configuration and bind signatures, messages, and stored state to the correct domain. Operators must avoid silently reusing production identifiers in test environments. A human-readable network name is insufficient when two deployments share branding or execution rules but have different settlement contracts and histories.

Rollup ID should be described through its execution, sequencing, data-publication, proof or challenge, bridge, and settlement stages. A transaction accepted by a sequencer has not necessarily been published, proven, finalized on the base layer, or made withdrawable. A cryptographic proof can reduce execution trust while leaving censorship, data, governance, and contract risks. The security model for Rollup ID includes sequencer control, proof or fault-resolution rules, data availability, bridge contracts, upgrade keys, and the base-layer verifier.

Payment applications using Rollup ID should maintain separate states for local acceptance, batch publication, proof verification or challenge completion, bridge execution, and base-layer finality. Fulfillment and withdrawal policies should use the stage that matches the business risk. Users should have a documented route to recover or exit when the preferred sequencer, prover, or interface is unavailable. Operational support needs monitoring for sequencer outages, delayed batches, proof failures, forced-inclusion paths, contract pauses, and upgrade events.