Thanks Gauntlet (@Pauljlei) for the thoughtful analysis on a quite important aspect of Aave v3 like it is e-mode, being one of the current growth engines.
Given that some of the proposed options touch on potential technical improvements to the protocol and important design decisions of it, we would like to comment on the following points:
- First and most important, Aave is a multi-collateral and multi-borrowing protocol in nature. Even if features like e-mode, isolated collateral or siloed borrowing factually create “sub-groups” of assets within a pool, creating deeper isolation by having multiple pools with the same assets but different risk configurations should be out of the picture, as it goes really against design decisions of the protocol and its unique selling proposition. We are firmly against any option of creating single LST-BASE pair pools, like Option 3 and 4.
- Even if not possible at the moment, it is technically possible to include supply/borrow caps exclusive to a specific e-mode, different from the caps of the same assets in non-e-mode. From BGD, we are glad to implement this.
- Currently, one limitation of the protocol is that 1 asset can only belong to 1 e-mode. This is problematic, especially because we agree that could be important too, for example, to have an e-mode for WETH and wstETH, together with a different e-mode for let’s say WETH, cbETH, and rETH.
Similar to the previous point, even being a current limitation, this can be implemented, and we are glad to do it.