We would like to clarify certain aspects regarding potential deployments of Aave in new networks, including giving some transparency on a case like Metis.
During the past months, we realized that Aave community members required more technical information from a party exclusively associated with Aave before taking a decision on deployment. While we were working on the framework (published here) for all candidates, we were contacted by Metis first, who already had some discussion in the previous month on this forum.
As our duty is to support people interested in any type of integration with Aave, we explained that we would like to do a technical report to present to the Aave community around their infrastructure, security and other misc key points, on the technical side. And we shared the set of points to analyze, described HERE, as it was in line with the framework we were about to publish too.
One thing we realized is that the initial snapshot didn’t have much participation, creating a bit a “gray” situation of what is authorized by the Aave community or not.
In addition, paradoxically enough, another framework for the authorization of new networks didn’t have much participation either (HERE) , so not even the rules of approval were properly approved.
And so, before elaborating our report, we recommended Metis to create a clear temperature check/signaling vote to really clarify high-level the appetite of the Aave community to deploy in Metis.
It is important to highlight that as we proposed in our framework, this should probably not be considered as the last vote of “deployment authorization”, because it seems unnatural that the community doesn’t get an opinion from us or other engaged parties, to inform their decision, as evaluation of a network is not completely straightforward.
The 150k quorum we suggested in our framework is just a reflection of the previously proposed framework and the rationale of it is:
- Meaningful amount of community members show up, with more than 50% of the requirements of on-chain Level 1 (320k).
- Still “softer” requirements than on-chain, as for example the AAVE requirements to create a Snapshot vote, and also because for us doing an assessment is simpler than producing entire development projects.
- We get clear signaling from the community to do the assessment work. Ideally, all candidates popping up in the forum would be assessed, but without really knowing if high-level the Aave community is interested, our work will be pretty useless.
Obviously, we are serving the Aave community, so could be important to at least understand if the 150k YES requirements sustain for the Metis vote, that way we will produce and publish a technical analysis about the network.