Ethereum Reports Disagree on Gas-Repricing EIP Number

All three outlets describe the same Platåberget testnet launch and Glamsterdam fork, but Blockchain.News cites a different EIP number for the gas-repricing feature than Cryptopolitan and Crypto Economy.

All three outlets describe the same Platåberget testnet launch and Glamsterdam fork, but Blockchain.News cites a different EIP number for the gas-repricing feature than Cryptopolitan and Crypto Economy.

What all sources agree on

• The Platåberget testnet went live on August 17, with the Glamsterdam fork scheduled for August 20.
• Glamsterdam introduces enshrined proposer-builder separation (EIP-7732) and block-level access lists (EIP-7928).
• According to Everstake, about 88% of Ethereum blocks are currently assembled off-chain through MEV-Boost relays.
• A community feedback and client-update period of roughly one month is expected before Glamsterdam progresses to Sepolia and Hoodi testnets.

Where the reports disagree

1EIP identifier for the gas-repricing / state gas dimension feature

The Foundation pointed developers to EIP-8037, which introduces the state gas dimension, plus EIP-2780 and EIP-8038 for the decomposed costs.

Cryptopolitan 2026-08-17 14:15

Developers were directed to EIP-8037, which introduces the state gas dimension, and to EIP-2780 and EIP-8038, which break down the associated costs.

Crypto Economy 2026-08-17 16:33

Gas Repricing (EIP-8007): Adjusts gas costs to target a ~200M gas floor, posing challenges for any tool that hardcodes gas limits.

Blockchain.News 2026-08-17 10:03

What would settle it: The Ethereum Foundation's official Glamsterdam EIP tracker or specification repository listing the finalized EIP numbers.

What to make of it

Treat the Platåberget launch date, fork date, and the 88% MEV-Boost figure as established across all three reports; hold off on citing a specific EIP number for the gas-repricing feature until the Ethereum Foundation's own EIP tracker confirms which identifier is correct.

Treat the Platåberget launch date, fork date, and the 88% MEV-Boost figure as established across all three reports; hold off on citing a specific EIP number for the gas-repricing feature until the Ethereum Foundation's own EIP tracker confirms which identifier is correct.

Originally reported by AltcoinGordon, written by Sophia Bennett. Republished with permission.

View the original on AltcoinGordon →

The post Ethereum Reports Disagree on Gas-Repricing EIP Number appeared first on TheCoinrise.com.