[COMPLETE] Wrap FIO Token Prototype
This effort prototypes a simplified end-to-end flow of FIO Wrapping.
Use case
Wrap FIO Token:
Alice (dApp) executes
wraptokens
on FIO chainOracle monitors
wraptokens
for transfersOracle executes ERC20
_mint
Oracle executes ERC20
approve
Alice (dApp) calls ERC20
balanceOf
to get balanceAlice (dApp) executes ERC20
transferFrom
Assumptions
Assume there is a single Oracle managing all transactions. Do NOT worry about multisigs, approvals, etc.
No validation on either chain is required.
Do not worry about oracle fee imbalances.
Diagram link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12f8iOoZjj1txZCJprpuQ5VFb8Ejpc9Bp/view?usp=sharing
Deployment
fio.wrapping: contract deployed to DEV server with V1 History (eventually will move to Hyperion)
oracle: daemon running on server
ERC-20: open zeppelin contracts on Ropsten testnet
Prototype Review
approve vs transfer when wrapping
Tracks the discussion regarding the best way to transfer wfio. There are two options listed below. It is important to note that some kind of dApp will be needed on both sides of wrap/unwrap in either case. So, the question becomes what functionality belongs in the oracle and the contracts versus what belongs in the dApp. Constructed correctly, the difference between approve and transfer can be “hidden” from the end user--it would simply show up as an extra step in the dApp.
approve
Steps:
User (via a dApp) calls
wraptokens
The oracle executes a
mint
then anapprove
The user (via a dApp) executes a
transferFrom
The user adds wfio token to Metamask (or similar) holding their Ethereum key and now sees their wfio
Pros:
This is a more standard approach to transferring ERC20 tokens. For example, Uniswap first asks users to “approve” the transaction. Once approved a second “transferFrom” step happens.
Using approve gives an extra layer of security to the transfer process. In theory, if a mistake is made during approve, the approval can be modified (assuming the transferFrom has not occurred).
The user pays the fees for the
transferFrom
Cons:
Extra steps
transfer
Steps:
User (via a dApp) calls
wraptokens
The oracle executes a
mint
to the users addressThe user adds wfio token to Metamask (or similar) holding their Ethereum key and now sees their wfio
After several discussions with the team, it was decided that the extra steps for the user to transferFrom
may not be worth the security benefits of using approve
. We will go with the direct mint.
Prototype Testing
Prototype environment:
fio.oracle and oracle server: http://44.234.122.169:8889
Dashboard: http://44.234.122.169:8000/
Ropsten endpoint: http://50.250.156.58:18545/ or ws://50.250.156.58:18546
dApp to interact with contract: https://oneclickdapp.com/matrix-second
contract address: 0x409F0d72e4700884200df4B11394b10A3539EB94
oracle: 0x41D1ADa8F67968F54Dbc55a259302dE700bC2bE9
Prototype was tested:
Called wraptokens with Eth address
Used https://oneclickdapp.com/matrix-second allowance to confirm available wfio (Oracle account currently holds the minted wfio)
Used transferFrom to transfer tokens to ETH address.
Added wfio token contract to Metamask and the correct amount of wfio appeared.
Todo
Only initial validation was done on wraptokens.
Need to update oracle to use _mint (to user address).