-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 684
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
Estimate Fees for XCM #690
Comments
Hello, with the migration to the polkadot-sdk single project, are there any updates relative to the ability to estimate XCM fees? |
@xlc gentle nudge |
Don’t nudge me, I am the one asking question and hoping someone else will answer me as well. |
@bkchr - would be great if someone from Dev Fellowship could comment on this and let interested parties know if and when this might be addressed. We see this as a limitation to the Dynamic fee mechanism on Moonbeam and should XCM continue to get traction, this will prove to be a problem for others. If you are not the right person to ping on this, is there a better way to get someone from the fellowship to take a look and provide some guidance? Thanks in advance |
I’m also aware of this behaviour, but am unsure what the best solution would be. Can you elaborate on the desired/ideal UX, and we can work backwards from that to fix/improve fee handling? |
|
We can take a look at this in the next XCM retreat, but in the meantime if you have any specific proposal for improvement, perhaps you can put it in an RFC. |
What about multi-hop XCMs? For example, going through a reserve chain C for transferring
Having this ^ would allow UIs to call into each runtime for every hop to query fees, but they'd be "guessing" what the intermediary XCMs look like. Probably we'd need to provide these intermediaries too as part of the dry-run. As in: But I'm secretly hoping there's a better/smarter way to do it.. |
Unfortunately, it is most likely that you will need to query multiple chains for a multi hop XCM execution. I just cannot see any way around it. But at least someone could build an SDK to abstract all those complex logics. and with light clients and the new polkadot-api (which I don't know what it is because there are zero docs exists), it should be possible to make the consumer side relatively easy. |
Bumps [serde](https://github.com/serde-rs/serde) from 1.0.136 to 1.0.137. - [Release notes](https://github.com/serde-rs/serde/releases) - [Commits](serde-rs/serde@v1.0.136...v1.0.137) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: serde dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-patch ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
There is |
Part of #3434 (comment): Current proposal is to provide runtime apis (callable from on-chain or off-chain) to effectively "dry-run" an XCM program, providing info on things like:
The same runtime API can then be called off-chain recursively on [intermediary, +] destination chains dry-running the XCMs got in 2. from previous hop. This way a wallet/dapp can dry-run the e2e path and get fees for each step. This runtime API can be later genericized/replaced with a new XCQ mechanism to get the same info (and more) using generic chain-agnostic queries (rather than chain-specific runtime api calls). Further, ideas were also discussed for some mechanism to actively lock-in the fee-price, to avoid synchronization issues between querying and executing. |
The PR provides API for obtaining: - the weight required to execute an XCM message, - a list of acceptable `AssetId`s for message execution payment, - the cost of the weight in the specified acceptable `AssetId`. It is meant to address an issue where one has to guess how much fee to pay for execution. Also, at the moment, a client has to guess which assets are acceptable for fee execution payment. See the related issue #690. With this API, a client is supposed to query the list of the supported asset IDs (in the XCM version format the client understands), weigh the XCM program the client wants to execute and convert the weight into one of the acceptable assets. Note that the client is supposed to know what program will be executed on what chains. However, having a small companion JS library for the pallet-xcm and xtokens should be enough to determine what XCM programs will be executed and where (since these pallets compose a known small set of programs). ```Rust pub trait XcmPaymentApi<Call> where Call: Codec, { /// Returns a list of acceptable payment assets. /// /// # Arguments /// /// * `xcm_version`: Version. fn query_acceptable_payment_assets(xcm_version: Version) -> Result<Vec<VersionedAssetId>, Error>; /// Returns a weight needed to execute a XCM. /// /// # Arguments /// /// * `message`: `VersionedXcm`. fn query_xcm_weight(message: VersionedXcm<Call>) -> Result<Weight, Error>; /// Converts a weight into a fee for the specified `AssetId`. /// /// # Arguments /// /// * `weight`: convertible `Weight`. /// * `asset`: `VersionedAssetId`. fn query_weight_to_asset_fee(weight: Weight, asset: VersionedAssetId) -> Result<u128, Error>; /// Get delivery fees for sending a specific `message` to a `destination`. /// These always come in a specific asset, defined by the chain. /// /// # Arguments /// * `message`: The message that'll be sent, necessary because most delivery fees are based on the /// size of the message. /// * `destination`: The destination to send the message to. Different destinations may use /// different senders that charge different fees. fn query_delivery_fees(destination: VersionedLocation, message: VersionedXcm<()>) -> Result<VersionedAssets, Error>; } ``` An [example](https://gist.github.com/PraetorP/4bc323ff85401abe253897ba990ec29d) of a client side code. --------- Co-authored-by: Francisco Aguirre <franciscoaguirreperez@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Adrian Catangiu <adrian@parity.io> Co-authored-by: Daniel Shiposha <mrshiposha@gmail.com>
Now that we have the XCM fee payment runtime API, we need a higher level runtime API UIs can use to estimate fees for the most common operations users do, starting with reserve asset transfers and teleports. These would need to fit well with pallet-xcm's I see two options, either we create a runtime API that returns the fees needed to be paid for each transfer type, or one that just returns the message that will be executed and the message that would be sent. I lean towards the second one. Given those messages, the UI could call the lower level API for getting the fees. This has the benefit we don't need to replicate the weight and valid assets thing on the higher level API. The downside is UIs would have to call two APIs instead of one, but they could cache the response of one of them for some time if that's a problem. |
Ongoing conversation happening in #3872 Cross-posting here as well: I was discussing something similar with @franciscoaguirre, exploring something similar: pub struct XcmDryRunEffects {
forwarded_xcms: Vec<(Location, Xcm<()>)>,
fees_spent_locally: MultiAssets,
// maybe more?
}
pub trait DryRunXcmApi {
/// query side effects for executing extrinsic
fn query_xcm_for_extrinsic(
xt: <Block as BlockT>::Extrinsic, // extrinsic to dry-run
query_side_effects: FnMut(), // optional closure to implement any custom logic
// for custom querying dry-run side-effects
// (balances changes, any particular storage changes)
) -> Result<XcmDryRunEffects, /* ErrT */>;
/// query side effects for executing (incoming) XCM
fn query_execute_xcm(
xcm: Xcm<()>,
using_origin: Location,
query_side_effects: FnMut(),
) -> Result<XcmDryRunEffects, /* ErrT */>;
} We want to:
Would this be enough to cover all needs? |
(Changed title to clarify this issue is now specialized on the ability to estimate total fees across multiple chains for cross-chain messages) The other side of the problem, namely how transport fees are actually charged in the executor is being tracked and discussed in #3434 |
The PR provides API for obtaining: - the weight required to execute an XCM message, - a list of acceptable `AssetId`s for message execution payment, - the cost of the weight in the specified acceptable `AssetId`. It is meant to address an issue where one has to guess how much fee to pay for execution. Also, at the moment, a client has to guess which assets are acceptable for fee execution payment. See the related issue paritytech#690. With this API, a client is supposed to query the list of the supported asset IDs (in the XCM version format the client understands), weigh the XCM program the client wants to execute and convert the weight into one of the acceptable assets. Note that the client is supposed to know what program will be executed on what chains. However, having a small companion JS library for the pallet-xcm and xtokens should be enough to determine what XCM programs will be executed and where (since these pallets compose a known small set of programs). ```Rust pub trait XcmPaymentApi<Call> where Call: Codec, { /// Returns a list of acceptable payment assets. /// /// # Arguments /// /// * `xcm_version`: Version. fn query_acceptable_payment_assets(xcm_version: Version) -> Result<Vec<VersionedAssetId>, Error>; /// Returns a weight needed to execute a XCM. /// /// # Arguments /// /// * `message`: `VersionedXcm`. fn query_xcm_weight(message: VersionedXcm<Call>) -> Result<Weight, Error>; /// Converts a weight into a fee for the specified `AssetId`. /// /// # Arguments /// /// * `weight`: convertible `Weight`. /// * `asset`: `VersionedAssetId`. fn query_weight_to_asset_fee(weight: Weight, asset: VersionedAssetId) -> Result<u128, Error>; /// Get delivery fees for sending a specific `message` to a `destination`. /// These always come in a specific asset, defined by the chain. /// /// # Arguments /// * `message`: The message that'll be sent, necessary because most delivery fees are based on the /// size of the message. /// * `destination`: The destination to send the message to. Different destinations may use /// different senders that charge different fees. fn query_delivery_fees(destination: VersionedLocation, message: VersionedXcm<()>) -> Result<VersionedAssets, Error>; } ``` An [example](https://gist.github.com/PraetorP/4bc323ff85401abe253897ba990ec29d) of a client side code. --------- Co-authored-by: Francisco Aguirre <franciscoaguirreperez@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Adrian Catangiu <adrian@parity.io> Co-authored-by: Daniel Shiposha <mrshiposha@gmail.com>
Now that the XcmDryRunApi was merged. There are still some next steps:
|
Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in #3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards #690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…4634) Depends on #4621. Implemented the [`XcmPaymentApi`](#3607) and [`DryRunApi`](#3872) on all system parachains. More scenarios can be tested on both rococo and westend if all system parachains implement this APIs. The objective is for all XCM-enabled runtimes to implement them. After demonstrating fee estimation in a UI on the testnets, come the fellowship runtimes. Step towards #690.
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…aritytech#4634) Depends on paritytech#4621. Implemented the [`XcmPaymentApi`](paritytech#3607) and [`DryRunApi`](paritytech#3872) on all system parachains. More scenarios can be tested on both rococo and westend if all system parachains implement this APIs. The objective is for all XCM-enabled runtimes to implement them. After demonstrating fee estimation in a UI on the testnets, come the fellowship runtimes. Step towards paritytech#690.
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de> # Conflicts: # cumulus/parachains/integration-tests/emulated/tests/assets/asset-hub-westend/src/tests/xcm_fee_estimation.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/assets/asset-hub-rococo/src/lib.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/assets/asset-hub-westend/src/lib.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/testing/penpal/src/lib.rs # polkadot/runtime/rococo/src/lib.rs # polkadot/runtime/westend/src/lib.rs # polkadot/xcm/xcm-fee-payment-runtime-api/tests/fee_estimation.rs # polkadot/xcm/xcm-fee-payment-runtime-api/tests/mock.rs
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de> # Conflicts: # cumulus/parachains/integration-tests/emulated/tests/assets/asset-hub-westend/src/tests/xcm_fee_estimation.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/assets/asset-hub-rococo/src/lib.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/assets/asset-hub-westend/src/lib.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/testing/penpal/src/lib.rs # polkadot/runtime/rococo/src/lib.rs # polkadot/runtime/westend/src/lib.rs # polkadot/xcm/xcm-fee-payment-runtime-api/tests/fee_estimation.rs # polkadot/xcm/xcm-fee-payment-runtime-api/tests/mock.rs
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de> # Conflicts: # cumulus/parachains/integration-tests/emulated/tests/assets/asset-hub-westend/src/tests/xcm_fee_estimation.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/assets/asset-hub-rococo/src/lib.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/assets/asset-hub-westend/src/lib.rs # cumulus/parachains/runtimes/testing/penpal/src/lib.rs # polkadot/runtime/rococo/src/lib.rs # polkadot/runtime/westend/src/lib.rs # polkadot/xcm/xcm-fee-payment-runtime-api/tests/fee_estimation.rs # polkadot/xcm/xcm-fee-payment-runtime-api/tests/mock.rs
…tytech#4621) Follow-up to the new `XcmDryRunApi` runtime API introduced in paritytech#3872. Taking an extrinsic means the frontend has to sign first to dry-run and once again to submit. This is bad UX which is solved by taking an `origin` and a `call`. This also has the benefit of being able to dry-run as any account, since it needs no signature. This is a breaking change since I changed `dry_run_extrinsic` to `dry_run_call`, however, this API is still only on testnets. The crates are bumped accordingly. As a part of this PR, I changed the name of the API from `XcmDryRunApi` to just `DryRunApi`, since it can be used for general dry-running :) Step towards paritytech#690. Example of calling the API with PAPI, not the best code, just testing :) ```ts // We just build a call, the arguments make it look very big though. const call = localApi.tx.XcmPallet.transfer_assets({ dest: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.Parachain(1000)) }), beneficiary: XcmVersionedLocation.V4({ parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.X1(XcmV4Junction.AccountId32({ network: undefined, id: Binary.fromBytes(encodeAccount(account.address)) })) }), weight_limit: XcmV3WeightLimit.Unlimited(), assets: XcmVersionedAssets.V4([{ id: { parents: 0, interior: XcmV4Junctions.Here() }, fun: XcmV3MultiassetFungibility.Fungible(1_000_000_000_000n) } ]), fee_asset_item: 0, }); // We call the API passing in a signed origin const result = await localApi.apis.XcmDryRunApi.dry_run_call( WestendRuntimeOriginCaller.system(DispatchRawOrigin.Signed(account.address)), call.decodedCall ); if (result.success && result.value.execution_result.success) { // We find the forwarded XCM we want. The first one going to AssetHub in this case. const xcmsToAssetHub = result.value.forwarded_xcms.find(([location, _]) => ( location.type === "V4" && location.value.parents === 0 && location.value.interior.type === "X1" && location.value.interior.value.type === "Parachain" && location.value.interior.value.value === 1000 ))!; // We can even find the delivery fees for that forwarded XCM. const deliveryFeesQuery = await localApi.apis.XcmPaymentApi.query_delivery_fees(xcmsToAssetHub[0], xcmsToAssetHub[1][0]); if (deliveryFeesQuery.success) { const amount = deliveryFeesQuery.value.type === "V4" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.type === "Fungible" && deliveryFeesQuery.value.value[0].fun.value.valueOf() || 0n; // We store them in state somewhere. setDeliveryFees(formatAmount(BigInt(amount))); } } ``` --------- Co-authored-by: Bastian Köcher <git@kchr.de>
…aritytech#4634) Depends on paritytech#4621. Implemented the [`XcmPaymentApi`](paritytech#3607) and [`DryRunApi`](paritytech#3872) on all system parachains. More scenarios can be tested on both rococo and westend if all system parachains implement this APIs. The objective is for all XCM-enabled runtimes to implement them. After demonstrating fee estimation in a UI on the testnets, come the fellowship runtimes. Step towards paritytech#690.
Completed in polkadot-fellows/runtimes#479 |
https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/blob/543462890784d6cd17b6c6f58b73c94d3b32a65d/xcm/xcm-executor/src/lib.rs#L242-L251
Right now it withdraw the fee from origin account directly. This is just bad.
UI will have hard time to estimate the actual fee.
User have no way to limit the fee amount.
I don't think right now it is possible to estimate fee of a XCM.
We can estimate weight and therefore there is no reason we can't estimate fee. We need some traits and runtime calls to allow frontend to do estimation.
Also I would like to see that fees should only be withdrawn from a fee register, which are prefilled with an instruction to withdraw assets into fee register. This way, user can specify the max fee to avoid unexpected charge.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: