Open tremarkley opened 3 weeks ago
main
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.
Generally much more in favor of putting the logic in the SuperchainTokenBridge given that its the cross chain bridging contract. Generally seems intuitive to put it there and mirrors our current design where the StandardBridge
has ERC20 + ETH functionality
See https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/design-docs/pull/146#issuecomment-2485139913
We agreed out of band that this functionality should live in the SuperchainWETH
contract rather than the bridge or liquidity contracts
One consideration that should be thought through is sending ether to a remote chain that is custom gas token, the flow should not unwrap the weth on the other side
@tynes updated the design to handle sending ether to a remote chain that is custom gas token
Description
This PR introduces a design for simplifying
ETH
transfers between two interoperable L2 chains by reducing the process from four transactions to two. The new approach leverages theSuperchainWETH
contract, which now includes two new functions:sendETH
andrelayETH
.sendETH
: DepositsETH
in theETHLiquidity
contract and sends a message to the destination chain, encoding the relay details.relayETH
: Withdraws the specified amount ofETH
fromETHLiquidity
on the destination chain and transfers it to the recipient.This update streamlines L2-to-L2
ETH
transfers, bypassing the need for separate wrapping and unwrapping steps. Notably, custom gas token chains are excluded from this simplification to maintain compatibility and reduce risk.Additional context
Any feedback on optimizing
sendETH
andrelayETH
for further efficiency or insights into handling custom gas token chains in the future is welcome.