# AssetHub Vision

**URL:** <https://forum.polkadot.network/t/assethub-vision/6934>\
**Category:** Ecosystem\
**Created:** [March 21, 2024, 6:49am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/assethub-vision/6934 "2024-03-21T06:49:19Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 12

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![acatangiu](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/acatangiu/32/540_2.png) [@acatangiu](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/acatangiu)\
**Post date:** [April 22, 2024, 5:25pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/assethub-vision/6934/12 "2024-04-22T17:25:15Z")

</div>

I just opened a thread discussing how the ecosystem should handle “the problem of multiple reserves” as evidenced by Asset Hub.

> [@Managing SAs on multiple Reserve chains for same asset](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/managing-sas-on-multiple-reserve-chains-for-same-asset/7538):
>
> Asset Hub as a DOT reserve Multiple parachains in the ecosystem are currently facing a dilemma: How to handle DOT reserves on chains other than PolkadotRelay? Nowadays in particular, handling Polkadot AssetHub as a reserve for DOT - which is seeing many new usecases. The main problem with “ChainX” allowing multiple chains as a reserve for DOT (or any asset for that matter) is that “ChainX” needs to balance its SAs (sovereign accounts) on the reserve chains so that when their users “claim” a re…

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/assethub-vision/6934)._