diff --git a/docs/src/SUMMARY.md b/docs/src/SUMMARY.md
index 64307033d8..346357afda 100644
--- a/docs/src/SUMMARY.md
+++ b/docs/src/SUMMARY.md
@@ -121,3 +121,4 @@
   * [Tick Verification](proposals/tick-verification.md)
   * [Block Confirmation](proposals/block-confirmation.md)
   * [ABI Management](proposals/abi-management.md)
+  * [Rust Clients](proposals/rust-clients.md)
diff --git a/docs/src/proposals/rust-clients.md b/docs/src/proposals/rust-clients.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..850d7f85e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/src/proposals/rust-clients.md
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+# Rust Clients
+
+## Problem
+
+High-level tests, such as bench-tps, are written in terms of the `Client`
+trait.  When we execute these tests as part of the test suite, we use the
+low-level `BankClient` implementation. When we need to run the same test
+against a cluster, we use the `ThinClient` implementation. The problem with
+that approach is that it means the trait will continually expand to include new
+utility functions and all implementations of it need to add the new
+functionality. By separating the user-facing object from the trait that abstracts
+the network interface, we can expand the user-facing object to include all sorts
+of useful functionality, such as the "spinner" from RpcClient, without concern
+for needing to extend the trait and its implementations.
+
+## Proposed Solution
+
+Instead of implementing the `Client` trait, `ThinClient` should be constructed
+with an implementation of it. That way, all utility functions currently in the
+`Client` trait can move into `ThinClient`. `ThinClient` could then move into
+`solana-sdk` since all its network dependencies would be in the implementation
+of `Client`. We would then add a new implementation of `Client`, called
+`ClusterClient`, and that would live in the `solana-client` crate, where
+`ThinClient` currently resides.
+
+After this reorg, any code needing a client would be written in terms of
+`ThinClient`.  In unit tests, the functionality would be invoked with
+`ThinClient<BankClient>`, whereas `main()` functions, benchmarks and
+integration tests would invoke it with `ThinClient<ClusterClient>`.
+
+If higher-level components require more functionality than what could be
+implemented by `BankClient`, it should be implemented by a second object
+that implements a second trait, following the same pattern described here.
+
+### Error Handling
+
+The `Client` should use the existing `TransportError` enum for errors, except
+that the `Custom(String)` field should be changed to `Custom(Box<dyn Error>)`.
+
+### Implementation Strategy
+
+1. Add new object to `solana-sdk`, `RpcClientTng`, where the `Tng` suffix is
+   temporary and stands for "The Next Generation"
+2. Initialize `RpcClientTng` with a `SyncClient` implementation.
+3. Add new object to `solana-sdk`, `ThinClientTng`; initialize it with
+   `RpcClientTng` and an `AsyncClient` implementation
+4. Move all unit-tests from `BankClient` to `ThinClientTng<BankClient>`
+5. Add `ClusterClient`
+5. Move `ThinClient` users to `ThinClientTng<ClusterClient>`
+6. Delete `ThinClient` and rename `ThinClientTng` to `ThinClient`
+7. Move `RpcClient` users to new `ThinClient<ClusterClient>`
+8. Delete `RpcClient` and rename `RpcClientTng` to `RpcClient`