EIP-3326 primary sources — 2026-05-09

Project status in this pass

• No standalone EIP-3326 whitepaper or litepaper surfaced.
• The clearest source of truth was the canonical EIP, with MetaMask documentation useful for confirming that the method remains part of real wallet-dapp integrations.
• The sources consistently frame EIP-3326 as a wallet-controlled active-chain switching interface.

Primary-source snapshots

1) Canonical EIP page

• URL: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-3326
• Key excerpt/signals:
  • The simple summary says it is an RPC method for switching the wallet’s active Ethereum chain.
  • The abstract says the caller specifies a chain ID, the wallet may refuse or accept, and null is returned on success.
  • The page is marked Stagnant, which matters because the method still appears in production wallet docs.
• Why it mattered:
  • This is the clearest source-level evidence that EIP-3326 standardizes a narrow but important wallet routing boundary.

2) Raw EIP text / active-chain semantics

• URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ethereum/EIPs/master/EIPS/eip-3326.md
• Key excerpt/signals:
  • The EIP says it presupposes the wallet has a concept of a single active chain.
  • It defines the active chain as the chain the wallet is forwarding RPC requests to.
  • The method uses a single object parameter containing only chainId.
• Why it mattered:
  • This shows EIP-3326 is about execution-context handoff, not chain metadata management.

3) Raw EIP text / wallet authority boundaries

• URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ethereum/EIPs/master/EIPS/eip-3326.md
• Key excerpt/signals:
  • The requested chainId MUST be a hexadecimal eth_chainId value.
  • The chain MUST be known to the wallet.
  • The wallet MUST be able to switch to that chain and service RPC requests there.
  • If the wallet does not have a concept of an active chain, it MUST reject the request.
• Why it mattered:
  • These requirements make clear that dapps can request context switches, but wallets retain authority over which chains exist and whether switching is even meaningful.

4) Raw EIP text / relationship to EIP-3085 and security model

• URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ethereum/EIPs/master/EIPS/eip-3326.md
• Key excerpt/signals:
  • The rationale explicitly points to EIP-3085 and EIP-2015 as related work, while saying EIP-3326 intentionally omits chain metadata because it is purely about switching the active chain.
  • The security section says wallets should display a confirmation clearly identifying the requester and the destination chain.
  • It also says wallets should cancel all pending RPC requests and chain-specific user confirmations when switching occurs.
• Why it mattered:
  • This is the strongest evidence that chain switching is a separate control surface whose real complexity lies in invalidating old execution context safely.

5) Raw EIP text / privacy considerations

• URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ethereum/EIPs/master/EIPS/eip-3326.md
• Key excerpt/signals:
  • Automatically rejecting unsupported or not-yet-added chains lets requesters infer which chains the wallet supports.
  • The EIP says implementers should consider whether that communication channel violates wallet security properties.
• Why it mattered:
  • This makes wallet refusal behavior part of the standard’s practical trust surface, not just an implementation detail.

6) MetaMask documentation

• URLs:
  • https://docs.metamask.io/metamask-connect/evm/reference/json-rpc-api/wallet_switchEthereumChain/
  • https://docs.metamask.io/metamask-connect/evm/guides/manage-networks/
• Key excerpt/signals:
  • MetaMask exposes a direct provider.request({ method: 'wallet_switchEthereumChain', ... }) example.
  • The network-management guide says MetaMask Connect supports both switching and adding networks, and its switchChain helper can take chain configuration for unknown chains.
• Why it mattered:
  • This is strong practical evidence that EIP-3326 remains a live wallet-dapp integration standard, and that production UX often combines switching with EIP-3085-style add flows when needed.

Working conclusion

EIP-3326 is best cataloged as active-chain routing control-plane infrastructure. The decisive evidence in this pass was its narrow request surface, explicit definition of active-chain semantics, wallet-first authority over known chains, security guidance around canceling in-flight confirmations, and continued use in MetaMask’s current integration docs.