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

feat: Disable internalization for individual solvers #2198

Closed
MartinquaXD opened this issue Dec 21, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed

feat: Disable internalization for individual solvers #2198

MartinquaXD opened this issue Dec 21, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@MartinquaXD
Copy link
Contributor

Problem

Our current rules around internal buffer trading are very simplistic and can be gamed quite easily.
Since gas costs currently don't matter for internalized trades you can find tiny opportunities that are not profitable due to gas costs. But if you internalize the same trade you get to take advantage of the opportunity to provide a better price for the user but in fact the protocol will end up paying the difference.

Suggested solution

Until we have a good long term solution for handling internal buffer trades we could consider introducing a flag in the driver (in the solver list) that can disable internalizations for solvers that seem to exploit the system.
That way we can continue using the solver without running the risk of paying for those costly trades while the solver maintainer implements a more "reasonable" strategy.

Alternatives considered

🤷‍♂️
This idea is only a bandaid that should be removed as soon as we get good rules for internal buffer trading that prevent this behavior.
Feel free to close this issue if you think this is not desired.

Additional context

Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

Acceptance criteria

internalization can be disabled for each solver individually using a configuration flag

Copy link

This issue has been marked as stale because it has been inactive a while. Please update this issue or it will be automatically closed.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant