Which ZTS should be used for gas on the L2?
- $ZNN
- $QSR
- Another ZTS (reply with proposed ZTS)
0
voters
1 Like
Can we do it like arbitrum- use native ZNN or QSR as the gas token and with the probability of a future airdrop of a governance token for the LAYER 2. Airdrop farmers will increas zenon exposure
I don’t see why not.
1 Like
I think ZNN should have the most utility into the ecosystem. Having it used for fee also mitigates its inflation, which could be a very interesting design decision.
5 Likes
That’s why I also voted for ZNN. Using it as gas for an EVM integration would greatly increase its utility.
I started researching EVM implementations and I think an EVM sidechain can be a first iteration in the right direction.
6 Likes
$ZNN is not a gas token period.
For now. Adding period to your sentence won’t close the discussion. The decision would be pushed on ZIP too soon and it might be better not to let people who can vote for ZIP chatting alone too soon imo.
Your argument is solely based on a few models with governance tokens that are not used for gas solely because they’re on $ETH. If they had their own chain what would it be ? Let’s not fight for ideology but for the best Zenon economy.
3 Likes
QSR is going to increasingly become a scarcer resource as individuals continue to set up more infrastructure- no need for it to function as gas on an L2 imo
2 Likes
Shouldn’t be a big deal unless the L2 absorbs a big chunk of the economy. If it does, then I don’t think we can just easily pick one without diving deep into the effect on the token economy of the underlying network.
Shazz voted for another token but didn’t reply, so I’ll post for him:
Shazz: zBTC 
3 Likes
Ya, I tend to agree. In my mind QSR is for progressive decentralize and throughput on the L1.
Bringing additional utility to $ZNN on other chains will drive demand and value to $ZNN.
6 Likes
In my opinion a Layer-2 and/or sidechain implementation will bring EVM/WASM compatibility for NoM and will greatly expand the ecosystem. The NoM Multichain Technology can become a de-facto hub for interoperability within the ecosystem.
This way, the base layer remains minimal & efficient as Mr Kaine emphasizes and all the heavy work/bloat is kept in a separate execution domain.
Pillars produce inflation as ZNN and they will also run the orchestrator nodes. It makes sense for them to also act as validators for a L2/sidechain where fees are paid in ZNN. The L2/sidechain should not produce additional/separate inflation. Pillars can bridge part of their ZNN inflation into the L2/sidechain ecosystem and they will be incentivized to bridge more if usage is high.
@NeoShredder ZNN is not a gas token because the L2/sidechain will use a wrapped representation of it. It can be called eZNN or xZNN (execution ZNN).
4 Likes
This makes a lot of sense.
Pillars yield (inflate) ZNN as rewards for the services they provide. Pillars convert ZNN into gas* (Hydrogen) and then sell the gas tokens to users, who then use the gas to pay for services.
The virtuous flywheel effect would plausibly increase the value of NoM as it would be fed by the TVL conversion from fiat and other currencies.
More value to NoM = more value to AZ = more dev funds = more development = max flywheel effects.
The implementation of Hydrogen token would also serve as a sort of insulation from delegating for yield and governance, vs network utilization gas.
*I think that an annotated ie xZNN ticker would be more confusing for the users and onboarding aliens, even though it makes more logical sense to a tech person, I think the average person would find it more confusing.
edit: although… how does the user get the gas?
- Buy ZNN on a CEX and convert it to gas.
- Buy the gas on a dex.
3.? How to make user friendly?
1 Like
Since gas is used with a L2 znn to gas conversion should be done at the bridge.
I don’t think it’s a good idea unless we could drive a lot of traffic to network. Gas token derived from znn goes against zenon feeless ethos imo.
Is it an ethos or a feature of the layer 0?
Evm could use gas, other vm’s could use plasma? :dunno:
Honest questions open to thoughts.
Any network participant will be able to convert ZNN to xZNN and use it inside the extension chain through a bridge-like system.
The feeless property is maintained at the base layer and if you want to use the extension chain, you must obey its rules.
We can use the decentralized bridge @sumamu built and tweak it to support this type of wrapping. It would be a little bit different from wrapping ZNN to wZNN and unwrapping it later because xZNN will actually be consumed/burnt in the extension chain, so it won’t be a 1:1 backing.
Fusing QSR and/or generating PoW enables the feeless property (via Plasma), not ZNN. ZNN is staked to produce QSR and adding another utility to it (converting it to xZNN that can be used as gas in an extension chain), will only increase its value.
On the contrary, xZNN will be associated with the gas concept for the extension chain.
Since there won’t be any inflation, the extension chain will only have a fee distribution mechanism:
- 33% distributed to builders (contract deployers)
- 33% distributed to extension chain validators
- 34% burned (similar to ETH)
2 Likes
Will this be inherently compatible with metamask?
1 Like
Yes. In fact with all the Ethereum/EVM ecosystem.
2 Likes
wow. So devs can simply take their solidity code and run it on the L2 with no modifications?
1 Like
Yep. No modifications whatsoever.
1 Like
Just change chain id etc