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

Allow ics20 to use multiple ports #463

Closed
ethanfrey opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

Allow ics20 to use multiple ports #463

ethanfrey opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
app Application layer. from-review Feedback / alterations from specification review.

Comments

@ethanfrey
Copy link
Contributor

Tokens with the same denom and same source chain, but coming from different ports are already distinguished in the current cosmos-sdk implementation (and I assume in the spec), thus limiting it to only one port on the other side is no longer needed for security.

For CosmWasm, we have a cw20 token contract (similar to erc20) and would like to implement ics20, so it can send tokens over ibc to another chain and redeem them (just one denom). We could require CosmWasm contracts on both sides with a custom protocol, but ics20 should be capable of this.

There would clearly be a difference of the uatom sent from transfer port vs. the uatom sent from wasm-cosmos1y3x7q772u8s25c5zve949fhanrhvmtnu484l8z.

I would request a change to the spec, and then we can look into realizing that in the Cosmos SDK.

@ethanfrey
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cwgoes this is what we discussed yesterday

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Aug 5, 2020

Aye, thanks for opening the issue. ICS 20 should be able to support this without trouble, since the denominations are already distinguished by the combination of port & channel identifiers.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
app Application layer. from-review Feedback / alterations from specification review.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants