System Chain channels must be open to all parachains

Governance
1

Currently, Ref 722 - Open HRMP channels between AssetHub and SORA is failing.

This is very problematic! System chains are a common good of the Polkadot ecosystem and if access to basic system features is denied, it puts the whole ecosystem into question.

Perspectives:

  • Towards project founders, it is a terrible signal if they decide to invest millions to build a project for Polkadot and then get denied basic system features
  • The Fellowship (especially @joepetrowski) states that system chains are just “an implementation detail” and should not be considered as being different from the relay chain. Access to the relay chain is permissionless for parachains, so access to system chains must also be permissionless.

System chain channel openings should be permissionless!

I understand that there are reasons to dislike or be distrustful of SORA, but these issues should be negotiated on the social layer and not be mediated by denying basic system feature access. The consequences of this behavior would be a devastating signal to other builders.

I ask all ecosystem stakeholders to support permissionless channel openings to system chains and vote in favor of channel openings despite any negative sentiments towards the project in question.

I also opened a ticket regarding this on Github: Make channel openings to system chains permissionless · Issue #325 · polkadot-fellows/runtimes · GitHub

4 Likes
2

This issue raised (and then developed) by @xlc solves this problem: Permisionless way to create HRMP channels between system parachains and other parachains · Issue #82 · polkadot-fellows/RFCs · GitHub.

It allows for a permisionless way for Parachains to open channels with system chains, by calling the method hrmp.establishChannelWithSystem(system_paraid) from the Parachain directly.

I know this is deployed on Rococo and Westend, so I believe that the next step should be to deploy this functionality on Kusama and Polkadot.

2 Likes
3

thanks for pointing that out. I have closed my ticket on Github

2 Likes
4

Hi gentlemen please take this as my learning curve, as everyone day or other day there is something new I am learning. I read the post & reply… What I’m gathering is that HRMP request to be opened on ref 722 can be fixed By XLC, because it’s a permission-less way to open HRMP channels making 722 null & void request, if XLC gets deployed?

If I got the above right, I’d XLC on track for deployment? :grinning:

5

It is already implemented and will be part of the 1.2.5 release.

1 Like
6

Thank you!

2 Likes