Great idea @jtremback, thanks for putting this together.
A few questions & thoughts to consider:
What would be an optimal period to deduct $ATOM for gas used from users? How quickly after is this $ATOM converted to the chains’ gas token? Depending on the length, the Hub could end up losing ( or making) money if ATOM depreciates ( appreciates) against used gas tokens, when replenishing ICA accounts.
Obviously this is a very low risk if the periods are short, but worth it regardless to enable such a use case.
At a first stage, integrating this at the staking module level seems unnecessary and could get a lot of justifiable pushback, similarly to the lsm which should have been opt-in by default. Instead, UniversalATOMGas could just deduct from staked $ATOM via the LSM. Another upside for this would be hedging against ATOM/gas-assets price decrease until next replenishment by earning staking rewards.
Deducting payment from UniversalATOMGas users after they have used gas could enable some, unlikely but still risky, attack vectors. Why not make users pay from their staked balance when they opt-in? For ex, set a minimum to opt-in. After which we extend a credit to the wallet with the equivalent amount to be used across all supported chains.
Personally, I think this is a great idea to pursue for the Hub. However using staked $ATOM could be just a feature and not the whole product. Instead the product would be a Gas Refuel across the whole Cosmos where the Hub maintains funded ICA accounts on all chains and users could opt in for gas refuel ( on the chains they choose) directly from the Hub via one of the following methods:
Using staked/ liquid $ATOM balance ( depending on their preference)
Using any liquid tokens across the Cosmos ( by converting it to $ATOM in the backend and depositing it with UniversalATOMGas
Using a fiat on-ramp service such as Kado ( where you buy $ATOM with fiat, great for onboarding new users)
the issue that i see is that ICA is in 1/4 of chains only and also in the chains that it’s live it’s not fully enabled or does not work as expected, so it’s not very viable, a lot of chains are not really into ICA stuff yet, the upgrade might conflict with their roadmap because there is other issues around this, for example Hyperlane uses TIA and afaik some of the chains built on it still depend on TIA, so some moduler/appchains built on TIA are off the table too.
@jtremback Thank you for bringing this idea to the forum.
This may be viable if opt-in only. Agreed with @arlai-mk that users would feel uncomfortable for any process, aside from slashing, to take their staked ATOM.
Looking forward to seeing this thread develop further.
This feature probably needs to ask the user whether the staked or unstaked ATOM should be used. I personally wouldn’t want my staked ATOM touched in any way. I like to spend on gas using the unstaked amounts. I would even say that the feature really should be built using unstaked ATOM as source of funds. I would imagine most people view their staked ATOM as an untouchable savings account. The unstaked ATOM is the checking account.
We believe this feature holds significant potential for enhancing both usability and the value proposition of the Cosmos ecosystem. Allowing users to pay for gas across Cosmos chains with staked ATOM, without the need to transfer tokens over IBC, will streamline interactions and reduce friction. This capability would notably simplify the user experience, reduce operational costs, and ultimately drive more engagement across the Cosmos ecosystem. To ensure the successful implementation and long-term scalability of this feature, we propose a phased, strategic approach as follows:
Develop Comprehensive Specifications for Scalability
Begin by creating the necessary technical specifications to enable this system to operate at scale. A well-defined set of standards will ensure that the architecture is robust and adaptable, allowing for the secure integration of multiple chains and future expansions. This initial step is essential to prevent issues related to interoperability and to support a consistent user experience across all participating chains.
Deploy with Close Partner Chains, Expanding within the Atom Economic Zone (AEZ)
Start by launching the feature with select partner chains within the AEZ. This controlled deployment will enable focused testing, allowing us to identify potential technical and operational challenges. A gradual rollout within the AEZ will facilitate troubleshooting and provide initial user feedback, creating a solid foundation for broader implementation.
Collaborate with Leading Wallet Providers for Seamless Integration
Once operational, partnering with top wallet providers will be essential to ensure a smooth and user-friendly experience. Integrating this feature into widely-used wallets will lower the barrier to entry for users, allowing them to access this capability effortlessly. By optimizing the user interface and experience (UI/UX), we can better position Cosmos for mainstream adoption, as an easy-to-use interface is crucial for retaining both new and existing users.
Expand Beyond the AEZ as Market Readiness Reaches Scale
With a tested, refined system and integrated UI/UX, expansion beyond the AEZ becomes viable. By this stage, Cosmos will have established both the technical capacity and user demand to support gas payments with staked ATOM across other Cosmos chains, opening doors to a new level of cross-chain utility and accessibility for users across the ecosystem.
Each phase will incrementally build the infrastructure and user familiarity needed for this feature to succeed long-term. Through these steps, we can create a sustainable path to implementing this feature at scale, making Cosmos even more accessible and attractive as a unified ecosystem.
Conclusions:
The aspect of your proposal that resonates with us most is the integration of the feeGrant mechanism with staked tokens, effectively creating a utility-based liquid version of users’ staked delegations. This approach achieves two significant benefits: it bolsters the Hub’s security—its primary goal—while also enhancing the Cosmos app-chain experience without compromising the sovereignty of partner chains involved in the program. Participating chains, in turn, can enjoy the added advantage of streamlined user onboarding, allowing them to facilitate network access without needing to substitute their native token for gas if they so choose.
On behalf of the PRO Delegators’ validator team, we look forward to see the proposition advancing to the “Signaling Phase” and want to share our full support.
Govmos.
We at GATA HUB fully support this initiative to enable staked ATOM as gas across Cosmos chains. Such functionality would streamline user interactions, enhance ATOM’s versatility, and encourage broader adoption by removing the need for all/liquid tokens for transactions. This approach aligns well with Cosmos’ vision for interoperability and user-friendliness across ecosystems. Implementing staked ATOM as a gas token could significantly boost ATOM’s utility and drive ecosystem growth. We look forward to contributing to the proposal’s development and successful adoption.
Validators who help maintain Cosmos Hub security have all the right to support this newly proposed feature.
Equally, if they are so inclined to push this forward, have it clearly, and explicitly, available to enable and affect ONLY participating Validator’s portion of staked ATOM as a gas token, hard stop. Validators should not cross over the line to enforce their personal beliefs, such as this proposed feature, unto users in the system.
Other users/members, in this thread, have clearly voiced their disapproval to have their soverign staked ATOM utilized. Arguably, seems a new “minority interest” is forming.
Looks like a great useful idea, but can you answer a few questions for better understanding?
If implemented what will be the default fee? will users have the flexibility to choose between staked or liquid Atom?
Can you tell me how much Atom was used last year as a gas fee?
If delegators have multiple delegations which delegation will be used as the fee first?
Why not go for unclaimed rewards? because if there is staked there will be unclaimed rewards as well.
If I am not wrong, Nomic BTC already implements this where if a user doesn’t have the fee to claim the rewards the fee will be deducted from the rewards.
Can we at least let different possibilities for the users ?
Picking from staked atom like proposed
Picking from available balance, in this case, API propose something like 0,1 atom but we can manually change this to max 0,5 ATOM. On the background the 0,1 atom are LSM and send away to pay for gas. When deposit reach almost zero, the APY could warn you and ask you to repeat process.
Seems like a good compromise for the user, like me, who would rather use available balance rather than staked ATOM.
If I staked 1000 ATOM, I don’t want to wake up everyday and see that number skrinking…
I think the recent, and very welcome, price increase of ATOM and some of the Cosmos chains (ex. Akash, …) is going to cause many users to sell ATOM as they do not see any revenue coming from all the chains not included in the partial set security in Cosmos.
If ATOM is the only gas to be paid is a good step and I guess sovereign chains like Akash would not feel bad to contribute slightly
This is an intriguing perspective; however, we believe it is more appropriate to address this functionality at the wallet level. Essentially, it would be a UX feature enabling users to select their preferred source for gas payments. The options could include using the native token of the local chain (if available) or ATOM, sourced either from their liquid balance or staked balance, as suggested by @Tagu.
Regarding the concern about seeing a staked balance shrink daily:
Users opting to use staked tokens as the primary source for gas payments are likely those inclined toward utilizing restaking features. In such cases, their balance would fluctuate based on the equilibrium between the stake’s compounding effects and gas consumption. This approach strikes a particularly elegant balance—it effectively offers free access to the entire Cosmos ecosystem as long as the rewards generated by their ATOM stake are sufficient to offset the gas costs across all supported chains.
