Hello @LlamaRisk .
Thanks for the feedback and provide another point of view on the proposal!
To answer your questions:
- With Umbrella, the core objective is to create an efficient Safety Module, leaving aside other considerations like the AAVE utility. That’s the reason why, even if we provided feedback to it, the proposal to change the AAVE tokenomics (and with them, stkAAVE utility) is a completely separate working item of the community, with all the details disclosed by the provider leading the effort (ACI) HERE.
However, we have also contributed on that side, with the potential concept of slashing hooks, that allows stkAAVE/stkABPT to actually keep further utility in connection with the Safety Module, even if with a more peripheral role. - The idea is to have as less parameters as possible, given that we have seen first hand how excessive parametrisation can create important bottleneck when combined with a system as decentralised as Aave. Generally the main configurations will be:
- Which stk assets should be instantiated (implicitly or explicitly, depending on the final implementation).
- Which rewards tokens will have each stk asset.
- The Safety Target of each stk asset: optimal size of the stake and the rewards at that level per unit of staked asset, relatively similar to the concept of Optimal Point on Aave v3 interest rate strategies.
- Minor configurations for the stk Utilisation Curve, to define how rewards rhythm changes depending on the assets staked, whenever being above/below the Safety Target.
- To answer also your question 3), the cooldown parameter, which highly-probable will be configurable. This is subjected to the final initial configurations of the system, as potentially a fixed value could be enough.