Proposal for mainnet launch phases

Hi all,

We’ve put together a proposal for the phases of mainnet launch - first described in an issue on the Namada repository, and now outlined on the Namada website. I’d like to start a thread here to invite feedback on these proposed phases, discussion of any potential concerns, and potentially coordinate community planning. This is just a proposal - what happens next is up to you!

Fire away :fire:

21 Likes

Great news :fire::fire::fire::fire: moon soon :rocket:

1 Like

wow , i know how se100 works hard

Exciting that this is happening!

Phase 1 makes sense to me to start getting some user-determined validator set choices determined. I personally would hope that this phase is like 3 days, but at most 2 weeks.

I don’t get why phase 2 and phase 3 can’t be combined. I don’t really see any point in turning on staking inflation prior to allowing IBC. I think it will lead to phase 2 user frustration to have to stake early for yield, but come back later to do their first thing here. (The NAM they get won’t even be distributable) Hence I think just combine phase 2 + 3 and jump to utility being provided. Seems like an unnecessary delay in time to market, with unclear utility to me.

6 Likes

The proposed plan appears promising, with the flexibility to make adjustments through governance. The Namada community and pilots, in particular, will play a crucial role in ensuring its success :slight_smile:

Viva La Namada!

Great, I guess hard work will be rewarded

let’s go team :fire: :fire: very good product

Agree for around 2 weeks for phase 1 and combining phase 2 and phase 3, but if these phases are combined what would be the milestones or timeline to move to phase 4? I guess the staking ratio would be important and the IBC/asset shielding volume?
Shielding rewards will be important to incentivize shielding assets and contributing to the unified shielded set to increase the privacy guarantees, so phase 4 should start soon after phase 2 & phase 3?
For the start of the last phase 5, is there some estimated timeline also or milestones such as the strenght of Namada’s unified shielded set?

Hello. I don’t quite understand some points: in your view, does the mainnet assume TGE or not? Further, do these phases have some kind of time limit, how long each phase can last? I’m just used to the fact that projects like yours (for example Celestia) go to the mainnet with TGE, and the community can use the native blockchain token for the intended utilities (governance, commission, etc.).

namada IS in the right way good Luck :sparkling_heart:

All the best Namada team

wow…great work! can wait to go live

Note: this post is a personal opinion only, not an organizational position.

Thanks all for the feedback! I’d like to address a few general points and some specific ones.

General points:

  • It’s important to note that this is only a proposal - what actually happens on the network is up to the community and Namada governance.
  • There are no specific timelines or durations associated with the phases on purpose - I think we should proceed to each next phase as soon as the community thinks that the software and network is ready for it, but not before. Assuming everything goes well, I think the phases could progress quickly.

Now to the specific ones:

From the user experience perspective, I agree that Namada isn’t useful until phase 3 is enabled. Part of the rationale behind this ordering of phases was to allow for state resets in phases 1 & 2 if something goes awry - once IBC assets are flowing, state resets are pretty much impossible. I still think that this ordering provides some defense-in-depth benefits, but I don’t think that the time between phases 2 and 3 needs to be particularly long.

The proposed genesis block for phase 1 of mainnet will include all previously detailed allocations, so in that sense one could consider it a TGE, I would think. NAM tokens themselves can be used for staking and governance immediately, but will not be transferable out of the network until phase 5. Does that help clarify?

1 Like

No, that’s not comprehensive information; what you think about TGE is just that - what you think. In reality, it operates differently, as ValorDragon correctly noted about the Celestia project.

The crypto community has always been accustomed to thinking of TGE’s as (TGE = Mainnet = Exchange Listings), roughly all at the same time, without significant delays! And the idea that allocations will be distributed and there will actually be a TGE is both amusing and funny. (without exchanges)

There’s a project like Chainflip, which launched last year, and it had a very smooth and beautiful start, without any delays in the form of (Phase), because everything had been tested in an Incentivized Testnet, lol! And after (TGE → Mainnet → Distribute Allocations → Exchanges in one time) I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Look forward to launch

Why is this feature there? Will it be available only for phase 5?

maybe using the term TGE is what’s confusing, because this seems pretty straightforward to me :person_shrugging:

the point of a graduated launch process is to have a period of time to ensure that everything operates as expected, because Namada is brand new software and built totally from the ground up. if something unexpected happens, there’s still a chance to relaunch, but only before NAM transfers are enabled

when the Cosmos Hub launched as brand new software, we did it in a similar way (except Hub had to hard fork to enable transfers, Namada has a parameter): Cosmos Hub to Launch Mainnet. Pre-launch Dependencies & How to Safely… | by Interchain | Interchain Ecosystem Blog

  1. propose genesis block (in which all NAM is assigned to addresses and parameters like turning off transfers are set)
  2. validator operators submit genesis txs to be merged into genesis block (so that they are active validators when the chain starts)
  3. validators launch Namada mainnet using genesis block (with everything turned off)
  4. more validators come online; token holders (the addresses in the genesis file) choose if & who they delegate to
  5. governance proposals are launched in stages, validators & delegators vote
  6. one of the governance proposals turns transfers on, at which point NAM will be transferrable

so yeah, there will be a live network and there won’t be NAM markets until NAM can be transferred. why is this a problem?

1 Like

governance proposal can always turn on/off NAM transfers

the idea is that Namada launches with NAM transfer parameter turned off in genesis file, then stakers vote to turn it on via on-chain gov. i suppose stakers could also vote to turn it off again at some point, but idk why

Phase 1:
Several validators have suggested that Namada should reduce the number of validators for genesis. Given the large number of operators, the uptime on the testnet has lacked consistency. We believe that a smaller, well-organized, and highly skilled set of validators could coordinate with the team effectively, ensuring a smooth launch of the chain without any disruptions. Once the chain is operational (before Phase 2), the validator set can be expanded, allowing others to join.

Don’t try to do so much at once. KIS

How quickly Namada gonna move from phase 1 to phase 5? If it takes too long, it’s gonna look like a flop since there was plenty of time during the bear market to fix any issues and prepare to launch (looks how good was Celestia & Chainflip Incentivized Testnet)