docs(CIP-14): define proposed param values #96
Conversation
|
Per CIP-1, test cases is optional, but for this CIP, I think it is helpful https://github.com/celestiaorg/CIPs/blob/main/cips/cip-template.md#test-cases |
| | Module.Parameter | Proposed value | Summary | Changeable via Governance | | ||
| |-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------| | ||
| | icahost.HostEnabled | `true` | Controls a chains ability to service ICS-27 host specific logic. | False | | ||
| | icahost.AllowMessages | `["/ibc.applications.transfer.v1.MsgTransfer", "/cosmos.bank.v1beta1.MsgSend", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgDelegate", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgBeginRedelegate", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgUndelegate", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgCancelUnbondingDelegation", "/cosmos.distribution.v1beta1.MsgSetWithdrawAddress", "/cosmos.distribution.v1beta1.MsgWithdrawDelegatorReward", "/cosmos.distribution.v1beta1.MsgFundCommunityPool", "/cosmos.gov.v1.MsgVote"]` | Provides the ability for a chain to limit the types of messages or transactions that hosted interchain accounts are authorized to execute by defining an allowlist using the Protobuf message type URL format. | False | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the table!
False
Should this be False? Potentially there may be desire to add more in the future?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I expect more messages to be added to this list in the future but IMO this list should be expanded via the CIP process rather than on-chain governance.
| | icahost.HostEnabled | `true` | Controls a chains ability to service ICS-27 host specific logic. | False | | ||
| | icahost.AllowMessages | `["/ibc.applications.transfer.v1.MsgTransfer", "/cosmos.bank.v1beta1.MsgSend", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgDelegate", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgBeginRedelegate", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgUndelegate", "/cosmos.staking.v1beta1.MsgCancelUnbondingDelegation", "/cosmos.distribution.v1beta1.MsgSetWithdrawAddress", "/cosmos.distribution.v1beta1.MsgWithdrawDelegatorReward", "/cosmos.distribution.v1beta1.MsgFundCommunityPool", "/cosmos.gov.v1.MsgVote"]` | Provides the ability for a chain to limit the types of messages or transactions that hosted interchain accounts are authorized to execute by defining an allowlist using the Protobuf message type URL format. | False | | ||
|
|
||
| ### Definitions | ||
|
|
||
| - `Host Chain`: The chain where the interchain account is registered. The host chain listens for IBC packets from a controller chain which contain instructions (e.g. cosmos SDK messages) that the interchain account will execute. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just realized a lot of this text is copied verbatim from the ICS27 spec in https://github.com/cosmos/ibc/tree/main/spec/app/ics-027-interchain-accounts . I think its good to have it here but maybe worth noting its a direct copy?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On re-read ICS-27 is linked here so defer to the CIP authors if they want to cite it again.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, but will wait on review from @womensrights @asalzmann and @sampocs
|
lgtm, I will submit a seperate pr linking to test cases in the ibc-go repo |
Currently CIP-14 is ambiguous with respect to the values it proposes for the host module parameters. The table in this PR aims to remove that ambiguity.
The values were chosen based on the latest messages in the forum post. I would appreciate reviews from the CIP authors: @womensrights @asalzmann @sampocs
Note: I think we also need to fill out the Test Cases section of this CIP prior to moving it to review