You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The bridge will need to charge fees for the sake of funding account storage and to prevent spam. Fees are currently broken down to cover the following:
onboarding assets: deploying contracts and initializing escrow to lock assets
base fee: a flat rate fee included for every bridge request
storage rate: the cost basis for each stored byte
Suggest A Solution
The fee to bridge an asset should be at least as much as it costs the bridge account to escrow the asset, if it needs to be escrowed at all.
This issue relates to the functionality of setting fees and validating bridging behavior when those fees are set, not necessarily the economics of the fee amount in question. In addition to fee feature integration, we will also need to consider and test the impact of the fee rates we choose to set at scale and ensure the final amounts safeguards against potential storage ddos vectors.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Issue To Be Solved
The bridge will need to charge fees for the sake of funding account storage and to prevent spam. Fees are currently broken down to cover the following:
Suggest A Solution
The fee to bridge an asset should be at least as much as it costs the bridge account to escrow the asset, if it needs to be escrowed at all.
This issue relates to the functionality of setting fees and validating bridging behavior when those fees are set, not necessarily the economics of the fee amount in question. In addition to fee feature integration, we will also need to consider and test the impact of the fee rates we choose to set at scale and ensure the final amounts safeguards against potential storage ddos vectors.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: