Skip to content
  • Adrian Catangiu's avatar
    pallet-xcm: enhance `reserve_transfer_assets` to support remote reserves (#1672) · 18257373
    Adrian Catangiu authored
    
    
    ## Motivation
    
    `pallet-xcm` is the main user-facing interface for XCM functionality,
    including assets manipulation functions like `teleportAssets()` and
    `reserve_transfer_assets()` calls.
    
    While `teleportAsset()` works both ways, `reserve_transfer_assets()`
    works only for sending reserve-based assets to a remote destination and
    beneficiary when the reserve is the _local chain_.
    
    ## Solution
    
    This PR enhances `pallet_xcm::(limited_)reserve_withdraw_assets` to
    support transfers when reserves are other chains.
    This will allow complete, **bi-directional** reserve-based asset
    transfers user stories using `pallet-xcm`.
    
    Enables following scenarios:
    - transferring assets with local reserve (was previously supported iff
    asset used as fee also had local reserve - now it works in all cases),
    - transferring assets with reserve on destination,
    - transferring assets with reserve on remote/third-party chain (iff
    assets and fees have same remote reserve),
    - transferring assets with reserve different than the reserve of the
    asset to be used as fees - meaning can be used to transfer random asset
    with local/dest reserve while using DOT for fees on all involved chains,
    even if DOT local/dest reserve doesn't match asset reserve,
    - transferring assets with any type of local/dest reserve while using
    fees which can be teleported between involved chains.
    
    All of the above is done by pallet inner logic without the user having
    to specify which scenario/reserves/teleports/etc. The correct scenario
    and corresponding XCM programs are identified, and respectively, built
    automatically based on runtime configuration of trusted teleporters and
    trusted reserves.
    
    #### Current limitations:
    - while `fees` and "non-fee" `assets` CAN have different reserves (or
    fees CAN be teleported), the remaining "non-fee" `assets` CANNOT, among
    themselves, have different reserve locations (this is also implicitly
    enforced by `MAX_ASSETS_FOR_TRANSFER=2`, but this can be safely
    increased in the future).
    - `fees` and "non-fee" `assets` CANNOT have **different remote**
    reserves (this could also be supported in the future, but adds even more
    complexity while possibly not being worth it - we'll see what the future
    holds).
    
    Fixes https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/1584
    Fixes https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/2055
    
    ---------
    
    Co-authored-by: default avatarFrancisco Aguirre <[email protected]>
    Co-authored-by: default avatarBranislav Kontur <[email protected]>
    18257373