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

[review] MIP-54: The Biarritz Model #54

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

l-monninger
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

@l-monninger l-monninger requested a review from apenzk as a code owner November 11, 2024 12:04
@apenzk apenzk changed the title [draft] MIP-54: The Biarritz Model [review] MIP-54: The Biarritz Model Nov 12, 2024
MIP/mip-54/README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
MIP/mip-54/README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
MIP/mip-54/README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
MIP/mip-54/README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
MIP/mip-54/README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
# MIP-54: The Biarritz Model
- **Description**: Proposes an AB-FFS L2 model that features on a Governed Gas Pool, Bridge Insurance Fund, and moderate operational assumptions.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What does "AB-FFS" mean? (Google not helping)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It should be NB-FFS. NB = native bridge, FFS = MIP-34.

AB was abbreviation for atomic bridge, but we moved on from that name.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Eventually all own abbreviations should go into the Movement glossary. but its wip

https://movementlabsxyz.github.io/MIP/GLOSSARY.html

@elliottdehn
Copy link

Why have the informer and the relayer be separate services? Unless they're just illustrated separately for clarity.
It's not clear to me that each would need to be separate from a resource profile perspective; more services means more complexity.

@apenzk
Copy link
Contributor

apenzk commented Feb 12, 2025

@elliottdehn

Why have the informer and the relayer be separate services? Unless they're just illustrated separately for clarity. It's not clear to me that each would need to be separate from a resource profile perspective; more services means more complexity.

The relayer should monitor that

  • circulating supply makes sense

This helps to check that

  • relayer works correct
  • relayer is still active

making them the same service seems to remove partially the point of an informer

@apenzk apenzk self-requested a review February 12, 2025 16:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs changes Requires attention & changes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants