IBC Spec conformity analysis

[gjermundgaraba]

To make sure the Solidity implementation follows the IBC Eureka spec, we need to do an analysis of the current implementation and see where we might be diverging from the spec. Once we have done that, we can go through those items and make plans to change them, or, if there are good reasons not to, document them.

[sangier]

E.g. in the solidity onRecvPacket the error handling is not aligned with the spec as it use errorAcks differently.

[srdtrk]

Can you elaborate about error acks @sangier ?

[sangier]

Sure! E.g. In ICS20v1 in the onRecv :

• we revert if the inputs data are not valid
• use error ack in case the bank module errors out.

In the solidity implementation:

• we error ack if some of the inputs are invalid or not resolved properly
• we don't handle gracefully the potential failure of escrow send and escrow mint (equivalent of bank), so in case of failure we would automatically revert.

There may be other cases like that, I haven't fully checked the code yet. Anyway that's an opportunity to clarify explicitly how we wanna implement the error handling behaviour: when to revert, when to error ack? why?