The post Avalanche and Toyota test a tokenized fleet appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Avalanche and the Toyota Blockchain Lab have presented a prototype of the Mobility Orchestration Network (MON) to manage fleets of robotaxis directly onchain: an infrastructure aimed at making payments, ownership, and vehicle traceability programmable, verifiable, and interoperable. The project is associated with an initial funding of approximately 10.8 million dollars, marking a significant step towards operationality. In this context, it is a step towards standardizing processes, rather than just a simple technical test. According to data collected by our analysis team and available public communications, the initial funding confirmed as of September 2, 2025, is consistent with the announcements of RWA projects and mobility infrastructures launched in the 2024–2025 period. We have followed the publicly released technical specifications and noted the focus on multichain components and interchain messaging, key elements to ensure rapid settlement and auditability. Industry analysts observe that the adoption of multichain layers can significantly reduce reconciliation times, shifting processes that traditionally required days to windows of hours or minutes, depending on the implementation, as explored in our analysis on Avalanche and multichain. What is the MON: the coordination layer for robotaxi mobility with Toyota and Avalanche The Mobility Orchestration Network is a blockchain layer designed to connect different mobility actors — manufacturers, insurers, financiers, fleet operators, authorities — on shared standards. In practice, the MON proposes itself as a “connective tissue” for data, transactions, and contracts related to vehicles, orchestrating trust and services among organizations that today operate on separate databases. An interesting aspect is the ability to align rules and verifications among parties that do not trust each other a priori and often have divergent requirements, a topic we discussed in a deep dive on blockchain interoperability. How the infrastructure works: Avalanche and Toyota for interchain messaging on robotaxis The prototype leverages Avalanche‘s multichain and Interchain… The post Avalanche and Toyota test a tokenized fleet appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Avalanche and the Toyota Blockchain Lab have presented a prototype of the Mobility Orchestration Network (MON) to manage fleets of robotaxis directly onchain: an infrastructure aimed at making payments, ownership, and vehicle traceability programmable, verifiable, and interoperable. The project is associated with an initial funding of approximately 10.8 million dollars, marking a significant step towards operationality. In this context, it is a step towards standardizing processes, rather than just a simple technical test. According to data collected by our analysis team and available public communications, the initial funding confirmed as of September 2, 2025, is consistent with the announcements of RWA projects and mobility infrastructures launched in the 2024–2025 period. We have followed the publicly released technical specifications and noted the focus on multichain components and interchain messaging, key elements to ensure rapid settlement and auditability. Industry analysts observe that the adoption of multichain layers can significantly reduce reconciliation times, shifting processes that traditionally required days to windows of hours or minutes, depending on the implementation, as explored in our analysis on Avalanche and multichain. What is the MON: the coordination layer for robotaxi mobility with Toyota and Avalanche The Mobility Orchestration Network is a blockchain layer designed to connect different mobility actors — manufacturers, insurers, financiers, fleet operators, authorities — on shared standards. In practice, the MON proposes itself as a “connective tissue” for data, transactions, and contracts related to vehicles, orchestrating trust and services among organizations that today operate on separate databases. An interesting aspect is the ability to align rules and verifications among parties that do not trust each other a priori and often have divergent requirements, a topic we discussed in a deep dive on blockchain interoperability. How the infrastructure works: Avalanche and Toyota for interchain messaging on robotaxis The prototype leverages Avalanche‘s multichain and Interchain…

Avalanche and Toyota test a tokenized fleet

2025/09/03 07:58

Avalanche and the Toyota Blockchain Lab have presented a prototype of the Mobility Orchestration Network (MON) to manage fleets of robotaxis directly onchain: an infrastructure aimed at making payments, ownership, and vehicle traceability programmable, verifiable, and interoperable.

The project is associated with an initial funding of approximately 10.8 million dollars, marking a significant step towards operationality. In this context, it is a step towards standardizing processes, rather than just a simple technical test.

According to data collected by our analysis team and available public communications, the initial funding confirmed as of September 2, 2025, is consistent with the announcements of RWA projects and mobility infrastructures launched in the 2024–2025 period.

We have followed the publicly released technical specifications and noted the focus on multichain components and interchain messaging, key elements to ensure rapid settlement and auditability.

Industry analysts observe that the adoption of multichain layers can significantly reduce reconciliation times, shifting processes that traditionally required days to windows of hours or minutes, depending on the implementation, as explored in our analysis on Avalanche and multichain.

What is the MON: the coordination layer for robotaxi mobility with Toyota and Avalanche

The Mobility Orchestration Network is a blockchain layer designed to connect different mobility actors — manufacturers, insurers, financiers, fleet operators, authorities — on shared standards. In practice, the MON proposes itself as a “connective tissue” for data, transactions, and contracts related to vehicles, orchestrating trust and services among organizations that today operate on separate databases.

An interesting aspect is the ability to align rules and verifications among parties that do not trust each other a priori and often have divergent requirements, a topic we discussed in a deep dive on blockchain interoperability.

How the infrastructure works: Avalanche and Toyota for interchain messaging on robotaxis

The prototype leverages Avalanche‘s multichain and Interchain Messaging (ICM) to coordinate multiple specialized networks, as described in Avalanche’s documentation. The result is an ecosystem where:

  • Data orchestration: telemetry, certifications, maintenance attestations, and driving logs are shared with granular access controls; this limits duplications and inconsistencies.
  • Automated transactions: payments, fees, and refunds are executed via smart contracts with rapid and verifiable settlement, reducing reconciliation times.
  • Interoperability: subnets and interchain messaging reduce silos and promote scalability and service portability across chains; it should be noted that composability remains a point to monitor.

5 services that the MON already enables in the prototype phase

  • Onchain payments and leasing: rides, fees, and network charges regulated in near real-time with automatic rules, reducing intermediation and delays. In this context, cash flow is more predictable.
  • Digital ownership and secondary markets: instant and verifiable transfers of vehicle or fleet shares; requires alignment with national registries for full legal validity, a non-trivial issue.
  • Crowdfunding for robotaxi fleets: issuance of security tokens and onchain management of flows, with transparency on assets and revenues for investors. Governance of rights remains central.
  • Insurance traceability and claims: signed data to reduce fraud, improve risk pricing, and accelerate reimbursements, especially when independent audits are needed.
  • Attestations and maintenance: digital certificates on parts, workshops, and software updates for a more reliable supply chain, with repeatable and historicized controls.

Tokenization: from vehicle to usage rights

The MON adopts tokenization to represent shares of vehicles, infrastructures, or usage rights. Thus, traditionally illiquid assets — like fleets or parking lots — become tradable, enabling new liquidity and shared revenue models. However, everything must integrate with KYC/AML rules and the regulatory frameworks of security tokens.

It should be noted that the classification of instruments varies by jurisdiction, and not insignificantly; for a complete picture, we refer to our article on security tokens and regulation.

Inside the architecture: standards, privacy, and verifications

  • Data standards: shared formats for telemetry, attestations, and vehicle identity reduce friction between legacy systems and simplify audits.
  • Privacy: access controls and segregation on subnets allow limiting the visibility of sensitive data; robust and auditable policies are needed for granular logs, also to avoid re-identifications.
  • Verifiability: hashes and digital signatures ensure integrity and audit trail, useful in case of disputes or regulatory requests. In this sense, the chain of custody is explicit.

Obstacles to overcome: regulation, integration, and responsibility

The main challenges are extra-technical. First, compliance: public registries must recognize onchain transfers and digital titles. Additionally, integrations with manufacturers’ systems, often proprietary, are needed.

Finally, responsibility in case of accidents and malfunctions must be clarified, especially when decisions and payments are automated by code. An interesting aspect is the coexistence between automotive regulations and frameworks for digital assets, as highlighted in the collaboration between Toyota and MIT.

Where the machine can stall

  • Legal harmonization between countries with different registries and practices, with non-uniform adoption times.
  • Network governance: who decides updates, access, and economic parameters, and with what quorums.
  • Data protection and minimization of personal telemetry, especially on board robotaxi fleets.
  • Operational resilience and cybersecurity for payment flows and critical commands; fault tolerance is crucial.

Impact on investments and markets

The RWA (Real-World Assets) trend on Avalanche aims to bring physical assets and cash flows onchain. If the MON moved to a pilot phase, operators could structure “end-to-end” models entirely on ledger: from fleet funding to revenue sharing.

The official confirmation of funding, around 10.8 million dollars, could better define scale and objectives, as highlighted by Avalanche and Helix. In this scenario, secondary liquidity would become more measurable and advantageous, as reported in previous deep dives on RWA and decentralized markets.

A realistic (indicative) timeline

  • Data integration: mapping between vehicle telemetry and MON formats; interoperability tests between subnets, with latency and reliability assessments.
  • Limited pilots: selected routes and cities, restricted use cases (payments and insurance), with public performance metrics.
  • Regulatory agreements: sandbox with authorities for legal validation of acts and digital titles, including responsibilities and audit trail.
  • Scalability: extension to secondary markets and structured finance instruments, maintaining risk controls.
  • Rollout: expansion to third-party operators and cross-jurisdiction interoperability, with defined and reviewable governance.

The comparison: why a traditional database is not enough

Existing robotaxi services operate with centralized stacks. The MON proposes coordination among parties that do not trust each other a priori, with executable rules and independent verifications. This reduces lock-in, facilitates audits, and enables native secondary markets. However, the simplicity of closed systems remains an advantage in regulated environments, and shared governance will need to prove it does not introduce unnecessary complexity and costs.

It should be noted that the trade-off between control and openness will remain a subject of continuous evaluation, as highlighted in the analysis on Ford and Toyota.

Sustainability: emissions accounting and credits

Onchain recording of energy consumption and routes allows for more transparent emissions accounting.

Carbon credits and certifications can be linked to specific rides, improving reporting and limiting greenwashing. Adoption will depend on alignment with international standards. In this context, data granularity is both an opportunity and a constraint, a topic we discussed in the context of blockchain and environmental sustainability.

Key roles in the MON ecosystem

  • OEMs and suppliers: definition of data standards and technical attestations, including cryptographic key management.
  • Fleet operators: management of economic flows and maintenance, with onchain traceable KPIs.
  • Insurers: dynamic models based on signed and verifiable data, with pricing responsive to events.
  • Regulators: recognition of acts on ledger and supervision of functional safety, also in a cross-border context.
  • Investors: onchain financial vehicles with integrated operational metrics, useful for evaluating return and risk.

Conclusion

The Avalanche–Toyota proposal for the MON brings the concept of robotaxi into an operational terrain: programmable payments, digital ownership, and verifiable supply chains. The technology is mature for pilots, but the real test will involve overcoming challenges related to regulation, integrations, and governance.

If these pieces align, autonomous mobility could enter an era of large-scale transparency and programmability. Ultimately, the trajectory is set, but execution will make the difference.

Source: https://en.cryptonomist.ch/2025/09/02/robotaxi-avalanche-and-toyota-test-a-tokenized-fleet/

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Vitalik Buterin Reveals Ethereum’s (ETH) Future Plans – Here’s What’s Planned

Vitalik Buterin Reveals Ethereum’s (ETH) Future Plans – Here’s What’s Planned

The post Vitalik Buterin Reveals Ethereum’s (ETH) Future Plans – Here’s What’s Planned appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin presented the network’s new roadmap, which includes its short-, medium-, and long-term goals, at the Developer Conference held in Japan today. Scalability, cross-layer compatibility, privacy, and security were the prominent topics in Buterin’s speech. Buterin stated that the short-term focus will be on increasing gas limits on the Ethereum mainnet (L1). He said that tools such as block-level access lists, ZK-EVMs, gas price restructuring, and slot optimization will be used in this context. The goal is to maintain the network’s decentralization while increasing scalability. The medium-term goal is to enable trustless asset transfers between Layer-2 (L2) networks and achieve faster transaction finality. In this context, “Stage 2 Rollup” solutions, proof-of-conduct combinations, and optimizations for reading data from L1 are on the agenda. Furthermore, network optimizations such as shortening slot times, fast finality protocols, and erasure coding are planned to improve user experience and security. Buterin emphasized that privacy is a priority for both the short and medium term. Zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs, anonymous pools, encrypted voting, and scrambling network solutions are highlighted to protect the privacy of users’ on-chain payments, voting, DeFi transactions, and account changes. Furthermore, secure execution environments, secret query techniques, and the ability to conceal fraudulent requests and data access patterns are also targeted when reading data from the chain. Buterin’s long-term vision highlights a minimalist, secure, and simple Ethereum. This roadmap includes resistance to the risks posed by quantum computers, securing the protocol with mathematical methods (formal verification), and transitioning to ideal cryptographic solutions. Buterin stated that these strategic steps will transform Ethereum into a more scalable, user-friendly, and secure infrastructure. With the strengthening of L2 networks, more users will be able to use Ethereum with less trust assumptions. The ultimate goal is for Ethereum to become a reliable foundational infrastructure for global…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 15:57
Will ERC-8004 repeat the mistakes of account abstraction?

Will ERC-8004 repeat the mistakes of account abstraction?

Author: Haotian Last time I talked about how the x402 protocol continues the Lightning Network. Recently, while having dinner with a group of programmer friends, I was "challenged" again: Isn't x402 just the previous AA account abstraction? The subtext is that Ethereum has been working on account abstraction for many years, investing so many resources in ERC-4337, Paymaster, and various grants and wallet service providers, but as we've seen, it has been criticized by many for being all talk and no action. Although I don't think AA has failed, what exactly is the problem? 1. Paymaster shifts the user's gas consumption to the project team, which sounds great, but the project team's motivation to burn money on payment is very weak, and the ROI is unclear. It has undoubtedly entered a dead end in the business model. How can it survive on blood transfusions without the ability to generate its own revenue? 2. The AA account abstraction is limited to the EVM ecosystem. For example, ERC4337, Paymaster, and EntryPoint contracts are all Ethereum-specific. If you want to achieve cross-EVM ecosystem use including Solana, BTC, etc., you have to add more middleware services to realize the function. However, the problem is that the middleware services add another layer of transaction fee sharing, which makes the ROI of the business model even more challenging! There are many complex technical issues, which I won't go into detail about, but to put it simply, AA is essentially a product of "technology for technology's sake," a work that reflects the past trend of pure research in Ethereum. In comparison, what is the x402 protocol all about? What are the differences? Some criticize it for bringing out the ancient HTTP 402 status code, which has been around for 30 years, and playing the game of carving on gold. But don't forget the HTTP 402 status code—this is the underlying protocol of the Internet, the common language of Web2 and Web3. AA requires smart contracts, on-chain state, and EVM virtual machine execution, while x402 only requires an HTTP request header and can be used by any system that supports HTTP—Web2 APIs, Web3 RPCs, and even traditional payment gateways are all compatible. This is not an optimization solution based on stacked technologies, but a "dimensional reduction attack" that simplifies the protocol layer. Instead of messing around with various compatibility, adaptation and trust methods at the application layer, it is better to first unify the standards of the upstream protocol layer. The key point is that x402 is a naturally good cross-chain interoperability standard. As long as the agent can send HTTP requests, handle 402 responses, and complete EIP-3009 authorization (or equivalent standards of other chains), whether it is Base, Monad, Solana, Avalanche or BSC, there is no cross-chain awareness at the protocol level. It is only reflected in the single point of failure of settlement and payment. In comparison, the cost of cross-chain is much lower. Facilitator can serve multiple chains simultaneously, and users' payment history data can be indexed uniformly. Developers can "connect" the entire ecosystem by integrating it once. My overall impression is that AA is a sophisticated project driven by a researcher's mindset, while the x402 protocol is a pragmatic approach forced by market demand. The question is, will ERC-8004 follow the same path as AA? From a purely theoretical perspective, ERC-8004 is very similar to AA 2.0. It is still exclusive to EVM and requires the deployment of a three-layer registry (Identity/Reputation/Validation). Early incentives also rely heavily on external subsidies or staking. These are all pitfalls that AA has encountered. If other chains want to be compatible, they will still have to add an extra layer of trust costs. The difference lies in the fact that, within the x402 framework, ERC-8004 is merely a tool, not a overarching standard. Other chains need to be compatible with the x402 protocol, not ERC8004. This difference in positioning is crucial. What was AA's problem back then? It wanted to become "the sole standard for Ethereum payment experience," demanding that the entire ecosystem revolve around it: wallets had to adapt, applications had to integrate, and users had to change their habits. This kind of top-down push, without a killer application and a clear ROI, naturally couldn't succeed. ERC-8004 is different. It doesn't need to be the main player because x402 has already solved the core problem: payment. ERC-8004 simply provides an "optional" trust layer on this already working payment network. Moreover, ERC-8004 is riding on the coattails of x402, so it doesn't need to build its own ecosystem from scratch. x402 already has a clear business loop (Provider traffic generation, Facilitator charging), a complete technology stack (HTTP protocol + EIP-3009), and an active project ecosystem. ERC-8004 only needs to be "plug and play".
Share
PANews2025/11/14 17:00