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

Estimate Fees for XCM #690

Closed
Tracked by #479
xlc opened this issue Mar 15, 2023 · 17 comments
Closed
Tracked by #479

Estimate Fees for XCM #690

xlc opened this issue Mar 15, 2023 · 17 comments
Assignees
Labels
I5-enhancement An additional feature request. T6-XCM This PR/Issue is related to XCM.

Comments

@xlc
Copy link
Contributor

xlc commented Mar 15, 2023

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Also I would like to see that fees should only be withdrawn from a fee register, which are prefilled with an instruction to withdraw assets into fee register.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.

@franciscoaguirre franciscoaguirre added the T6-XCM This PR/Issue is related to XCM. label Mar 22, 2023
@Sophia-Gold Sophia-Gold transferred this issue from paritytech/polkadot Aug 24, 2023
@noandrea
Copy link

Hello, with the migration to the polkadot-sdk single project, are there any updates relative to the ability to estimate XCM fees?

@noandrea
Copy link

noandrea commented Dec 6, 2023

@xlc gentle nudge

@xlc
Copy link
Contributor Author

xlc commented Dec 6, 2023

Don’t nudge me, I am the one asking question and hoping someone else will answer me as well.

@bkchr
Copy link
Member

bkchr commented Dec 7, 2023

CC @franciscoaguirre

@aaron2048
Copy link

@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

@acatangiu
Copy link
Contributor

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?

@xlc
Copy link
Contributor Author

xlc commented Dec 8, 2023

  1. Fee register to easily cap max fee.
  2. Runtime API to dry run XCM and returns outcome and fees and weights. If all the fees are deducted from fee register, then it is simply calculate how much is deducted from it.

@gavofyork
Copy link
Member

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.

@acatangiu
Copy link
Contributor

acatangiu commented Dec 8, 2023

What about multi-hop XCMs? For example, going through a reserve chain C for transferring TokenC from A to B, or going over a bridge.

Runtime API to dry run XCM and returns outcome and fees and weights. If all the fees are deducted from fee register, then it is simply calculate how much is deducted from it.

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:
Dry-run this XCM, you get back execution cost/weight, delivery cost to first hop, first hop location, and XCM to be sent to first hop, then you repeat dry-runs with new intermediary XCMs for each hop to destination.

But I'm secretly hoping there's a better/smarter way to do it..

claravanstaden added a commit to Snowfork/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Dec 8, 2023
)

* Fix first execution header with incorrect sync aggregate

* Fix interface.

* Changes max tries to slots in epoch

* Adds missing increment.
@xlc
Copy link
Contributor Author

xlc commented Dec 8, 2023

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.

@acatangiu acatangiu self-assigned this Jan 19, 2024
helin6 pushed a commit to boolnetwork/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Feb 5, 2024
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] <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@muharem
Copy link
Contributor

muharem commented Feb 5, 2024

There is BuyExecution { fees: Asset, weight_limit: WeightLimit }, user can set the asset id to be used from registry and the weight limit. But no separate fee registry.
And there is a runtime api to query a weight and an estimated fee for for a call - link.
It would be nice to hear what we need on top of it.

@acatangiu
Copy link
Contributor

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:

  1. local side effects
  2. forwarded messages: forwarded XCM content and its destination
  3. locally spent fees

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.

@acatangiu acatangiu added the I5-enhancement An additional feature request. label Feb 28, 2024
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2024
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 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Adrian Catangiu <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daniel Shiposha <[email protected]>
@franciscoaguirre
Copy link
Contributor

franciscoaguirre commented Mar 27, 2024

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 transfer_assets and xtokens' transfer at a minimum.

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.

@acatangiu
Copy link
Contributor

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:

  • find out locally paid fees as part of locally executing an XCM either coming from some other location or coming from some locally run extrinsic
  • for same as above, find out any outgoing XCMs and their destinations as a result
  • be able to repeat the same operations on said destinations for these outgoing XCMs
  • optionally, caller can provide FnMut closure to query anything they want in Runtime before fn is done and temp db layer with side effects is dropped.

Would this be enough to cover all needs?

@acatangiu acatangiu changed the title Improve Fee handling for XCM executor Estimate Fees for XCM Mar 28, 2024
@acatangiu
Copy link
Contributor

(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

dharjeezy pushed a commit to dharjeezy/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Apr 9, 2024
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 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Adrian Catangiu <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daniel Shiposha <[email protected]>
@franciscoaguirre
Copy link
Contributor

Now that the XcmDryRunApi was merged. There are still some next steps:

  • Adding it to all system parachain runtimes
  • Integrate into xcm-emulator tests
  • Put it in fellowship runtimes

github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 29, 2024
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 <[email protected]>
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 31, 2024
…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.
hitchhooker pushed a commit to ibp-network/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jun 5, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
hitchhooker pushed a commit to ibp-network/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jun 5, 2024
…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.
ntn-x2 pushed a commit to KILTprotocol/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jun 10, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
ntn-x2 pushed a commit to KILTprotocol/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jun 10, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
ntn-x2 pushed a commit to KILTprotocol/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jun 13, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
ntn-x2 pushed a commit to KILTprotocol/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jul 12, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
ntn-x2 pushed a commit to KILTprotocol/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jul 13, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
fgamundi pushed a commit to moondance-labs/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jul 17, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
# 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
fgamundi pushed a commit to moondance-labs/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Jul 17, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
# 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
girazoki pushed a commit to moondance-labs/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
# 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
TarekkMA pushed a commit to moonbeam-foundation/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2024
…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 <[email protected]>
TarekkMA pushed a commit to moonbeam-foundation/polkadot-sdk that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2024
…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.
@acatangiu
Copy link
Contributor

Completed in polkadot-fellows/runtimes#479

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
I5-enhancement An additional feature request. T6-XCM This PR/Issue is related to XCM.
Projects
Status: Shipped
Status: Done
Status: In-Review
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants