Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Modify calculated channel value once total escrowed amounts are added to IBC #3677

Open
nicolaslara opened this issue Dec 9, 2022 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@nicolaslara
Copy link
Contributor

Background

From the readme:

We have iterated on different strategies for calculating the channel value. Our preferred strategy is the following:

  • For non-native tokens (ibc/...), the channel value should be the supply of those tokens in Osmosis
  • For native tokens, the channel value should be the total amount of tokens in escrow across all ibc channels

The later ensures the limits are lower and represent the amount of native tokens that exist outside Osmosis. This is
beneficial as we assume the majority of native tokens exist on the native chain and the amount "normal" ibc transfers is
proportional to the tokens that have left the chain.

This strategy cannot be implemented at the moment because IBC does not track the amount of tokens in escrow across
all channels (github issue). Instead, we use the current supply on
Osmosis for all denoms (i.e.: treat native and non-native tokens the same way). Once that ticket is fixed, we will
update this strategy.

Suggested Design

  • Modify channel value to use escrowed amounts
  • Modify tests to match

Acceptance Criteria

Rate limiting uses escrowed amounts

@nicolaslara nicolaslara self-assigned this Dec 9, 2022
@osmo-bot osmo-bot moved this to Needs Review 🔍 in Osmosis Chain Development Dec 9, 2022
@nicolaslara
Copy link
Contributor Author

ref: cosmos/ibc-go#3019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Needs Triage 🔍
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant