For your reference, I recommend this article. It’s really interesting because It make me come up with the same concept idea for GCNetwork
Credit from the article :
“ … The term ‘layer 0’ can be interpreted in several ways, a reasonable catch all definition is:
‘A communication protocol, enabling smart contract execution across multiple chains, with one transaction from any one source chain enabling cross-chain functionality for dApps and (native) token bridging’.
Why is this important? For any DeFi users across multiple chains, it should be self evident, even more so for the multi-chainooooors …”
*Reading full by click on here
LayerZero is not a blockchain, it is a protocol, largely operating off chain with ‘ultralight client end points’ which are smart contracts built on chains it is aiming to connect. Chains will include L2s, as well as L1s; and later non-EVM, as well as EVM.
As far as I know this is a great concept for SuSy since it’s focused on oracles/DONs/Bridges.
GCNet must be somehow utilized GTON or its derivative asset as a fee token and the chain itself must be focused on growing adoption of the GCEco users.
Am I right? Looking from someone from GC core team to clarify this.
Layer0 narrative seems to be a bit off compared to where we wanna go - building a true cross-chain solution would take a lot of resources and direct focus away from building a tool that helps others build projects on top. I think for now we should be more DeFi/synthetic assets focused & build a chain around that so that new economic models are easier to implement here.
One of the possible interesting ways to go forward as we discussed with the team - was to create a chain with a stablecoin used as chain’s native token - this does unlock a lot of DeFi possibilities since at least one component of DeFi complexity is eliminated - there is no need for USD price oracles for the assets on chan so you can launch any pegged assets easily without need for decentralised oracles and such
Globally there are only 4 options for gton.network:
- non-EVM (L1)
- EVM (L1)
- Rollups (L2 with EVM)
since we have seen that many big TVLed non-EVM L2s somehow are moving into EVM we also think that EVM is a main choice here.
so we’re choosing between L2 or EMV-L1
after many talks with eth core devs we are more in favor of L2 implementation since it will be secured by ETH main consensus and can be easily integrated as shard into ETH2.0
We can even try to push for a crowdsource campaign to advocate for inclusion into ETH 2.0 since it’s actually cool to see new players come along and try to make change instead of same old names getting all the benefits and higher TVLs. An interesting marketing move
yes, I like the dynamic of L2s recently:
zk rollups btw is far from production yet
but optimistic rollups are growing fast recently
how was avalanche subnet option? it needs some minimum AVAX staking but can be used as a private chain.
For L2, fantom could be a good place like TombChain(https://twitter.com/tombchain)
Fl you said about security when GCNetwork was build as a L2 of ETH, I think it’s worth to brainstorm this idea because recently some new potential L2 are emerging and they really attract builders to join their eco such as Starknet, Zksync .v.v.
yes, we’re preparing a proposal to build L2 with $GTON as staking (PoS) token and $GCD as payment token for the chain
there will be no questions about utility of algo stable collateralized by GTON
most of DEXes will automatically utilize $GCD as primarily market
after ethdubai our confidence in that direction is even more stronger
I think that using $GCD as native token is good idea to increase demands.
$GTON as staking (PoS) token
in GCNet, does it mean it needs to have some node staking/delegation model?
yeah, something like that. Unfortunately it’s not well described in Optimistic Rollups like OE, arbitrum, metis, bobo docs. More info can be found in the source code.
working on it now
L2 seems like the most reasonable option too from the perspective that we can better ensure the safety of the blockchain towards investors.