I’m trying to formulate an interim takeaway from this discussion for myself.
First, what I’ve realized is that if fast sync is not fully automated and integrated directly into Zebra, it’s unlikely that new nodes will actually use it.
Second, the storage and distribution of snapshots inevitably ends up being centralized, which is conceptually different from the usual p2p synchronization model. Even with verification mechanisms in place, this still requires trusting an external source and a new piece of infrastructure.
Third, the time savings appear to be limited. In real-world operation, syncing from genesis does not take that long and is largely constrained by the speed of the internet connection (which I practice from time to time), while remaining fully transparent and protocol-native.
I understand the concerns around centralization and the practical benefits, but I think it is important to separate decentralization across different layers.
In a system like Zcash, the protocol rules, consensus validation, account correctness, balances, and privacy guarantees must remain strictly decentralized. At the same time, infrastructure such as compiled binaries (zebra), Docker images, snapshot distribution, and wallet-facing API services are inherently centralized today. This is already the case in the current ecosystem, and it does not weaken Zcash’s decentralization, because all core state and rules remain publicly verifiable and cannot be overridden by any single party.
From an operational perspective, syncing from genesis to a usable node currently takes on the order of 10 hours in practice (which matches my own experience on a 50 Mbps connection), with the chain database approaching 300 GB. While this may be acceptable today, it becomes a growing concern if we look ahead to shorter block times, larger state sizes, multi-asset support, and a broader set of developers, partners, and infrastructure operators relying on L1 nodes. For those use cases, reducing cold-start time from many hours or even days down to 1–4 hours would be a meaningful improvement.
For this reason, I see this direction as an infrastructure investment for future ecosystem growth. It is not intended to replace the protocol-native synchronization path, but to provide an efficient, verifiable option for scenarios where deployment speed and operational cost matter.
Thank you for your submission. After consideration from ZCGand sufficient time for the community to provide feedback on the forum, the committee has decided to reject this proposal.
The committee appreciates your grant submission efforts and encourages you to continue as an active member of the Zcash community going forward! Details on the committee’s decision will be shared in the minutes later this week.