Closed Rozengarden closed 3 months ago
Foundry report
forge 0.2.0 (e5318c3 2024-03-21T00:19:03.663363464Z)
Regarding assets (not so technical, but consistency-wise), the proposal is consistent with the table on Snapshot, but considering certain assets as "long-tail" collaterals while the following not seems completely inconsistent:
Ethereum
Polygon
-removed ETH UNI & BAL Freeze -removed polygon EURS change
Updated forum post
Rest of remarks will be implemented after governance decision with a second payload
For the assets being freezed, I think it makes sense to change the LTV to 0 as well. In v3.1.0, it should happen by default when an asset is being freezed - but for now I think setting it manually makes sense.
For alternative stablecoins except USDC, USDT are we very strict to set LTV 0 and LT reduction by 3%? If so,
For the assets being freezed, I think it makes sense to change the LTV to 0 as well. In v3.1.0, it should happen by default when an asset is being freezed - but for now I think setting it manually makes sense.
For alternative stablecoins except USDC, USDT are we very strict to set LTV 0 and LT reduction by 3%? If so,
- No changes to sUSD on optimism?
- No reserve factor update on EURe on gnosis? also sDAI
sUSD implemented RF but no offboarding as there's a use case with synthetix there EURe RF implemented but sDAI can't be borrowed so no implementation to do
@marczeller I assume keeping the LT reduction of UNI and BAL is on purpose, even if this https://governance.aave.com/t/arfc-stablecoin-harmonization-and-asset-parameters-optimization/16802/7 ?
@marczeller I assume keeping the LT reduction of UNI and BAL is on purpose, even if this https://governance.aave.com/t/arfc-stablecoin-harmonization-and-asset-parameters-optimization/16802/7 ?
that is correct. we will add an option in snapshot vote to revert this, not change anything or confirm LT reduction allowing governance to decide.
my test are failling during the first call to vm.serializeJson(reserves, {}) with error "Invalid Data"