[VEN-2687]: Multichain governance on zksync sepolia #384
Conversation
vips/vip-365/bsctestnet.ts
Outdated
| { | ||
| target: ZKSYNCSEPOLIA_ACM, | ||
| signature: "giveCallPermission(address,string,address)", | ||
| params: [ZKSYNCSEPOLIA_OMNICHAIN_EXECUTOR_OWNER, "setSrcChainId(uint16)", zksyncsepolia.NORMAL_TIMELOCK], | ||
| dstChainId: ZKSYNCSEPOLIA_CHAIN_ID, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| target: ZKSYNCSEPOLIA_ACM, | ||
| signature: "giveCallPermission(address,string,address)", | ||
| params: [ | ||
| ZKSYNCSEPOLIA_OMNICHAIN_EXECUTOR_OWNER, | ||
| "transferBridgeOwnership(address)", | ||
| zksyncsepolia.NORMAL_TIMELOCK, | ||
| ], | ||
| dstChainId: ZKSYNCSEPOLIA_CHAIN_ID, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we didn't grant these two permissions for Sepolia, Arbitrum sepolia and opBNB testnet. Here: https://github.com/VenusProtocol/vips/blob/main/vips/vip-330/bsctestnet.ts. But we did it for the mainnets
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, you are right. I believe we should synchronize the permissions between the mainnet and testnet. For the other testnet networks (Arbitrum Sepolia, Sepolia, and opBNB testnet), we can update the permissions in this PR #395 . WDYT?
vips/vip-366/bsctestnet.ts
Outdated
| againstDescription: "I do not think that Venus Protocol should proceed with this proposal", | ||
| abstainDescription: "I am indifferent to whether Venus Protocol proceeds or not", | ||
| }; | ||
| return makeProposal( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We granted the fast-track and critical timelocks to execute some actions that we are not including here:
- setTrustedRemoteAddress
- setTimelockPendingAdmin
- setGuardian
Reference: https://github.com/VenusProtocol/vips/blob/main/vips/vip-331/bsctestnet.ts
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, you are right. I believe we should synchronize the permissions between the mainnet and testnet.
Description
Resolves VEN