Axelar fixes #240
Axelar fixes #240
Conversation
need to fix IBC middleware mocks
needs regenerated mocks for staking
Invalid legacy proposals do not seem to return a specific error code, but rather fail silently. For the initial invalid proposal test, we submit it and then query the gov module to see that no props have been created.
EricBolten
requested review from
jackzampolin,
kkennis and
mvid
as code owners
| { | ||
| Name: "arbitrum", | ||
| Id: 42161, | ||
| ProxyAddress: "0xEe75bA2C81C04DcA4b0ED6d1B7077c188FEde4d2", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So we use the same proxy contract for each? the proxy routes to the correct gateway?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's no targeting of gateways. The proxy contract is the contract we're trying to hit that is an Axelar executable. The gateway reaches out itself to call the executable (calling the execute function on the proxy contract) when the call is recorded in state on Axelar.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The addresses are the same because Crispy deterministically deployed it to each L2.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The addresses are the same because Crispy deterministically deployed it to each L2.
Is there anything expecting the casing checksum to match the respective chains?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not certain, we're passing along a string in the ICS-20 message and Axelar is handling it. I assume they are resolving it correctly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Eth doesn't include chain information in the checksums for addresses like Cosmos does
Draft PR for updates to the Axelar module.