There is some misleading statements above.
In this proposal there is no need for anyone to do any balancing, AMMing or anything.
The two differences from the current state:
- Internal balance is considered some token instead of NEAR by default. Which means that operations like
withdrawanddepositinside EVM are operating on token standard (e.g. callingtransferon NEP-21) - when calling
callmethod for EVM, can not attach deposit anymore. Instead must use token standard to move assets first. Note, that this is true for majority of use cases anyway, as people will want to move DAI, wNEAR, etc into EVM and back.
Then specific instantiation of EVM that depends on wETH token will have dependency on the bridge. Alternatively, one can also instantiate EVM that uses wNEAR, DAI or anything else as base token.
I’m fully onboard with relayers via base NEAR accounts, but to make this work well we need to address two major issues:
- Current price for storage is too high, and given trustless relaying would require a contract per user, we need to reduce it at least by 10 if not 100x. At least for repeating contracts (there is NEP for that) E.g what’s described here Using NEAR with Ethereum wallets is not really practical right now without changes.
- EVM vs WASM is not really the differentiation. The differentiation is sync vs async environments. So it would be better to have unified version of sync envs (for example all contracts under *.name live on the same shard). Then contracts can be WASM or EVM independently and co-exist freely.