CIP-1: Canton Improvement Proposal Process and Guidelines

[Zalarcan768]

It would be interesting to see an example of a rejected CIP and how that decision was documented

[soffije]

@Oleksandr_Mihalatii

This is well structured and easy to follow. Are there any example CIPs (even early drafts) that people can look at? Seeing a couple of real submissions usually makes it much easier for first-time contributors to get started.

Hi, @Oleksandr_Mihalatii !

Great question, and yes. At the moment, there are no finalized CIPs beyond CIP-1 itself, as this proposal is intentionally defining the process before substantive proposals are introduced.

However, the following are planned and will serve as early reference examples once CIP-1 is adopted:

• A Standards Track – Core CIP covering validator coordination and upgrade signaling in the Global Synchronizer.
• A Governance CIP describing Super Validator onboarding and removal procedures.
• An Interface / API CIP documenting canonical RPC patterns for permissioned network interoperability.

In addition, CIP-1 itself is written as a canonical example of structure, formatting, and lifecycle management (Draft → Last Call → Final/Active). New contributors are encouraged to use it as a direct template.

Once the first few Draft CIPs are merged, the repository will explicitly label them as “reference implementations” for authors, to lower the barrier for first-time submissions.

[soffije]

@DenD

Who exactly can submit a CIP? Is it restricted to existing Super Validators and partners, or is the process open to any developer building on the Canton Network? Clear guidelines on ‘who has a seat at the table’ would be very helpful

Hey, @DenD !

CIP submission is open to any developer, organization, or community member building on or interacting with the Canton Network. There is no requirement to be a Super Validator, network operator, or official partner in order to author and submit a Canton Improvement Proposal. Any contributor may open a pull request that follows the CIP template and participates in the public discussion process.

However, who participates in decision-making depends on the type of CIP. Proposals that affect core protocol behavior or network safety require review by Canton core developers and approval through network governance, including Super Validators. Governance and Tokenomics CIPs similarly require formal governance approval before they can be finalized.

In contrast, Process CIPs and non-core Standards Track proposals advance primarily through community discussion, editorial review, and demonstrated consensus. This structure ensures that the CIP process remains open and inclusive at the proposal stage, while reserving final authority for the stakeholders responsible for network security, compliance, and operations.