DeFi Pulse Profile picture
The pulse of the grassroots.

Oct 7, 2021, 13 tweets

1/ ICYMI weโ€™re doing scaling week at DeFi Pulse and today weโ€™ll be talking about BRIDGES!

Do you know about the different approaches to bridging assets?

Join us for an informational thread!
๐ŸŒ‰๐ŸŒ‰๐ŸŒ‰๐ŸŒ‰๐ŸŒ‰๐ŸŒ‰

2/ Letโ€™s start with some basics:

When you transfer assets to a scaling solution, youโ€™re interacting with a minimum of three protocols:
๐Ÿ“ซThe base chain
๐ŸŽฏThe target chain
๐ŸŒ‰The bridge

In this txn, your assets are only as safe as the weakest link!

3/ In other words, if youโ€™re bridging from Protocol A with 1000 nodes to Protocol B with 300 nodes, but the bridge is controlled by 3 people - you might as well be reading CeFi Pulse!

4/ So what is a bridge?
A bridge is a protocol that:
- Verifies you own Asset X
- Custodies that Asset X on Protocol A
- Mints or releases Asset X to you on Protocol B

5/ There are three types of bridges:
1โƒฃ Natively verified (ex: Cosmos)
2โƒฃ Externally verified (ex: Thorchain)
3โƒฃ Locally verified (ex: Connext)

Every approach has pros and cons so grab your notebook!

6/ Natively Verified:

If Protocol A and B have the same underlying consensus mechanisms, they can verify each other w/o relying on a 3rd party bridge!

Pro: trustless
Con: if the consensus mechanism aren't the same a custom mechanism is needed (e.g. ETH-PoW and Tendermint-PoS)

7/ Externally Verified:

A 3rd party set of validators manages the bridge (typically using a multisig or MPC). This approach usually requires validators to post a bond as an economic incentive.

Pro: Universally applicable
Con: Relies on trust, less capital efficient

8/ Locally Verified:

Often referred to as a state channel - two parties independently verify each other and then settle later with the chain.

Pro: trustless and can work across consensus mechanisms
Con: Doesnโ€™t work for all types of txns

9/ So which txns do locally verified bridges not work for?

๐Ÿ‘‰When there is no *logical owner*.

To bridge an NFT you need to mint it on a new chain. Only the smart contract on the original chain can call that mint function - so there is no *logical owner* on the new chain๐Ÿ˜ฟ

10/ This brings us to the Interoperability Trilemma (b/c everyone on CT loves a good #trilemma)

PICK 2
a) Trustless
b) Easily scaled (extensible)
c) Universal (generalizable)

A natural tradeoff for token bridges.

๐Ÿ“ธPC: @ConnextNetwork

11/ And with that, weโ€™d like to introduce the worst meme ever made in the #ethereum and broader #crypto community

12/ A big thanks to @arjunbhuptani from @ConnextNetwork for helping us put together this thread!

To dive deeper into the interoperability trilemma and learn about NXTP, check out Arjunโ€™s post here:
medium.com/connext/the-inโ€ฆ

13/ If you have any questions about bridges, we'd love to hear them!

Feel free to:
๐Ÿ‘‰Join our discord: discord.gg/PgqFQ8tr
๐Ÿ‘‡ or comment with your questions below

Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.

A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.

Keep scrolling