{"items":[{"id":"","index":901,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":901,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2dyLdZTBZ1Lr87SfEp7r7dwENXVSDSr3GnYX3YJ6vhm","reward":"2810000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":900,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":900,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2dxjYEL7c6ymsM996UcwK3xBnKQmSxKx6DNEwsVoSQg","reward":"1800000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":899,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":899,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2dsXbyC866w2tFM4vH52nRs3uTwac32jh1FNXZBXv18","reward":"1830000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":898,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":898,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2dyjeWEiCk1t1jn71fyRUN2uaz2G14S783BCR3LvvaD","reward":"2050000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":897,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":897,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2dtXiF6igjy92dz2qURWwjwmi8Z5A98tiq4Kzj2ffxn","reward":"2050000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":896,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":896,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2ei1mSnnHfZRqweboFRPTzvQEo6xdjhdycF496KBnPg","reward":"560000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":895,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":895,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2eaQ9Mu3kQtDwn1GpxjhSq6vXLTDdLVewLtayoUaW61","reward":"1100000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":894,"title":"Deposit DOT into parachain child accounts to accelerate opening XCM channels","content":"**tl;dr:** deposit 2261 DOT into the Polkadot relaychain \"Child\" accounts of fourteen parachains to make it easier to open XCM channels between chains.\n\n### Background:\nIt takes a bit of work to open XCM channels between Polkadot parachains. Besides XCM runtime configuration, the team needs to deposit DOT into the parachain's Child account, or governance needs to sell some of their token for the DOT. Then Chain A passes a referendum to initiate opening one HRMP channel, Chain B accepts and sends a channel open request back. Then Chain A governance accepts the channel back. 10 dot need to be 'bonded' in each direction, so 20 DOT on each side of a bidirectional XCM channel. If dev teams are primarily working on their own chain's use case they might not spend time figuring out the XCM calls to make this happen. It's also important to know that when you bridge (XCM transfer) your DOT from the relaychain to one of the parachains, the DOT tokens don't actually leave the relaychain but instead are held in the sovereign acct, the \"Child\" acct on the relaychain corresponding to the destination parachain. Therefore for any DeFi chain receiving DOT, its Child acct will already hold plenty of DOT to use for opening XCM channels. But non-DeFi chains won't naturally have this DOT in their Child accounts.\n\n### Problems:\n1) Several OG chains STILL only have one or two XCM channels open\n2) I hear some users ask when their favorite parachain token will be available on the Hydration DEX and the answer is \"once the team opens an XCM channel\".\n\nTherefore I'd like to work on submitting lots of parachain governance proposals to open more XCM channels such as:\n* Hydra <-> NeuroWeb (OT), EWT, XRT\n* Bifrost <-> PEN, ZTG, PLMC, CRU\n* Interlay <-> Kilt, ZTG, XRT\n* EnergyWeb <-> everyone (but they need to update XCM config?)\n* Mythical <-> Bifrost, Interlay, Kilt\n* Kilt <-> AssetHub, Interlay, Moonbeam, Astar, CFG, MYTH, PLMC\n* CFG <-> Astar, PEN, Composable, INTR, Kilt\n* PHA <-> CRU, KILT, MYTH, PLMC\n\nThis should make a lot more parachain tokens more accessible to Polkadot DeFi on Hydration, Bifrost, Moonbeam, Astar, increase the amount of XCM traffic, and remove one technical barrier to further integration and use case development between chains.\n\n### Solutions:\n1. Polkadot Treasury deposit some DOT into the Child accounts of several non-DeFi parachains. (THIS proposal) Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: quick and easy\n * Con: risk of parachain teams/governance taking the money. But 100-200 DOT is less than $1k; surely not worth the PR risk\n2. Polkadot governance proposals to force open XCM/HRMP channels without requiring a DOT deposit/bond for the channels\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: removes parachain sovereignty. How do we know if the chain's team and community want to or are ok with opening the channel?\n3. Parachain governance proposals to XCM transfer some of their tokens to a DEX, swap for DOT, and then transfer that DOT to the parachain's Child acct on the relaychain. Then submit gov proposals to each parachain to open channels.\n * Pro: no risk of loss of funds\n * Con: more time consuming to craft the 'sell' XCM calls (but doable). One more referenda for each of the chains to pass.\n4. Register all assets on AssetHub, and transfer tokens between app chains via AssetHub\n * Pro: don't need more XCM channels\n * Con: I've never seen an example transaction that it works. Creating two separate signed transactions for ParaA -> AssetHub -> ParaB would make the UI worse. Heck, Hydra transfers of vDOT to Interlay still require first sending the vDOT to Bifrost and then to Interlay.\n5. Use Hyperbridge ICMP instead of XCM\n * Pro: Parachains register once instead of requiring many point-to-point channels]\n * Con: each parachain needs to integrate several pallets, so adoption will likely be slow.\n\nI collected initial feedback on X and the results indicate that 72% of the 36 voters thought this would be a good initiative to seed several of the child accounts with some DOT (Option 1 above) to accelerate opening channels. A Subsquare discussion post received more feedback and suggestions, but no blockers against pursuing opening more XCM channels using some treasury funds.\n\nhttps://x.com/spazvt/status/1819234741343678970\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRWYKbAVrGarfBJvvNNCTWqLRALH5tiH3kpsBp5jnbmVU)\n\n### Implementation Details:\n\nI propose that we target an account balance of 205 DOT for chains that are more niche or smaller market cap or don't have as many imaginable connected use cases vs a target balance of 305 DOT in the Child accts of 'larger' parachains. In the table below `Gap` is the amount of DOT that I propose sending to each child account in order to reach the `Target` balance.\n\n| Chain\t | Parachain ID\t| DOT in acct\t| Target | Gap |\n| ------------- | ------------- | ------------- | ----- | --- |\n| Centrifuge\t| 2031\t | 141\t | 305\t| 164 |\n| Crust\t | 2008\t | 95\t | 205\t| 110 |\n| Darwinia\t | 2046\t | 199\t | 255\t| 56 |\n| EnergyWebX\t| 3345\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Frequency\t | 2091\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| InvArch\t | 3340\t | 22\t | 205\t| 183 |\n| Kilt\t | 2086\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Mythical\t | 3369\t | 24\t | 305\t| 281 |\n| Neuroweb (OT)\t| 2043\t | 49\t | 205\t| 156 |\n| Peaq\t | 3338\t | 25\t | 205\t| 180 |\n| Phala\t | 2035\t | 249\t | 305\t| 56 |\n| Polimec\t | 3344\t | 67\t | 205\t| 138 |\n| Robonomics\t| 3388\t | 0\t | 205\t| 205 |\n| Subsocial\t | 2101\t | 63\t | 205\t| 142 |\n\nThis totals 2261 DOT which would be sent from the Polkadot treasury to parachain accounts.\n\nWhile opening new XCM channels via parachain governance, I'll also register tokens on chains that have the `assetRegistry` pallet. After I successfully open at least 50 XCM channels, I plan to submit a tip request for around $3000, paid in DOT.","createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":4},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-25T08:54:54.001Z","description":"","index":894,"origin":null,"proposer":"13YMK2ef1Sd4zVkT7Qmji3fMvz4gEpoGUyRPAt8pBjamne88","reward":"1640000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}}},{"id":"","index":893,"title":"[Small Tipper] Referendum #1100 - Creation of Head Ambassador pages in PolkadotJS apps","content":"A tip request for [creating](https://github.com/polkadot-js/apps/pull/10838) in a very fast pace the polkadotJS/Apps [Head Ambassador page for member listing and referenda voting](https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fcollectives-polkadot-rpc.dwellir.com#/ambassador) after the [initial issue request](https://github.com/polkadot-js/apps/issues/10829)\n\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmPXDcnTDoJ9CjmQhkDshuUHhLeik64ifjFSN7fEkDmKgR)\n![image.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmccYiUHcedT3gHPCVsC8auHwaRFBsGbo1qRKUmEQNRmXk)\n\nP.S. This is outside the scope of fellowship activities - and was completed during personal time, as a pressing requirement for HAs to get started","createdAt":"2024-08-21T08:50:48.000Z","updatedAt":"2024-08-21T08:50:48.000Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"subsquare","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"isDefaultContent":false,"metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":0},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-21T08:50:48.000Z","description":"","index":893,"origin":null,"proposer":"14ojxBcoCEacmKYoQopPE9vNo9nhWRAbX88bED7uJP6KKSxN","reward":"2500000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}},"publicUser":{"id":7301,"username":"wirednkod","profileScore":12.75,"createdAt":"2023-03-08T10:39:27.482Z","rank":374,"addresses":["5FsSorMjLTK9KnYHTAmP616DwXo3p7cTSdQ74v8YkJ4o8wDG","5GGuRUMUNZkzG1BemNyQ5ua5WovpgCJ5pJbhLJDQXs2iETEx"],"profileDetails":{"achievementBadges":[],"badges":[],"bio":"","image":"","title":"","coverImage":"","publicSocialLinks":[]}}},{"id":"6ZN9nRsMZupUe9HqwKnE","index":892,"userId":22456,"title":"AssetPortal (Milestone 1)","content":"Proposer: ASSET PORTAL\n\nRequested amount: 30,981.00 DOT\n\nPurpose of the proposal: The primary objective of this funding is to enhance the value of the Asset Hub network by developing and delivering a versatile and intuitive asset management portal to the community. Leveraging the network’s functionalities, our goal is to provide a satisfying user experience when logging into Asset Hub. Additionally, we aim to streamline navigation across the entire Polkadot ecosystem through a purpose-designed user interface.\n\nSummary:\nWe are aware of the importance of Asset Hub, the idea of transferring token holding from the Polkadot relay chain, and the limitations it currently faces due to a lack of UX/UI. That is why we decided to create this portal and aim to increase the number of Asset Hub users and the ecosystem as a whole.\nOur goal is to create a portal where users can send their tokens from a CEX to Asset Hub (to the wallet of their choice), view their assets, and from there provide the corresponding facilities to enable them to transfer those tokens to the parachain of their choice or interact with Asset Hub.\nIn AssetPortal, users will be able to:\nView their wallet balances (either in read-only mode or by connecting an installed wallet).\nTransfer their tokens.\nUse XCM to redirect their tokens to a parachain.\nDiscover the DEFI ecosystem of Polkadot.\nSwap assets on the Asset Hub pallet.\nUse the Polkadot-Kusama bridge.\nCreate and mint new assets.\nManage the assets they've created.\nInteract with their NFTs.\nAnd more.\nAdditionally, we plan to connect Kusama Asset Hub and bring those functionalities as well.\n\nMoreover, it is worth mentioning that the project is completely open-source (you can see all the code [here](https://github.com/NicolasBiondini/asset-portal))\nYou can visit us at assetportal.io to explore all the features we offer.\n\n\nYou can read the full proposal [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y02qaY9DxcpaLTl42t2rbt5_RTvgbhkAL69Ms3PokIc/edit?usp=sharing).\n\nContact:\nhttps://assetportal.io\n\nhttps://x.com/AssetPortal\n\nassethubportal@gmail.com\n\nAsset Portal Team.\n\n\n\"We are unable to verify the identity of this account because it's not currently working\"\n","createdAt":"2024-07-26T16:14:00.001Z","tags":[],"proposalType":"TreasuryProposal","network":"polkadot","dataSource":"polkassembly","allowedCommentor":"all","isDeleted":false,"topic":"general","metrics":{"reactions":{"like":0,"dislike":0},"comments":2},"onChainInfo":{"createdAt":"2024-08-21T06:17:06.000Z","description":"","index":892,"origin":null,"proposer":"13GWBPM43rRAnyEU5gwbUZsnaDyC1ZChvMfCe546NJjaJeKs","reward":"309810000000000","status":"Awarded","type":"TreasuryProposal","hash":"","voteMetrics":{"nay":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"aye":{"count":0,"value":"0"},"support":{"value":"0"},"bareAyes":{"value":"0"}}},"publicUser":{"id":22456,"username":"AssetPortal","profileScore":0.25,"addresses":["5ELD345zC59hMSDx83tbLR3dibyYKFeZqrviUn4jpDi48Tgp"],"rank":6397,"createdAt":"2024-07-25T22:29:33.383Z","profileDetails":{"achievementBadges":[],"badges":[],"bio":"","image":"","title":"","coverImage":"","publicSocialLinks":[]}}}],"totalCount":1022}

Treasury Proposal (0)