Polkassembly Logo

Create Pencil IconCreate
OpenGov

Notice: Polkadot has migrated to AssetHub. Balances, data, referenda, and other on-chain activity has moved to AssetHub.Learn more

View All Discussion
Referendum#213
Discussion#2579

Moving a paraid to a new manager address - Kabocha

userjelliedowl
3 years ago

EDIT - No-one has objected, so I'm going to go ahead with this.

I'm interested in the communities views on whether the following is technically feasible and whether they would likely support it, please.

We're coming to the end of the Kabocha parachain lease (paraid 2113), and we've secured another lease on another paraid (2268). Unfortunately, I hadn't realised that the parathread would instantly upgrade to a parachain and lock lease swaps, so we're going to need to use a root referendum to resolve it.

However, there are a few other longer term issue that we'd like to resolve at the same time, if possible. The current paraid is on a regular single owner account. We'd like to move it to another account - probably a pure proxy so we can update control of the account as key people move in and out of the project. I believe there isn't currently a way to update the manager of a paraid?

With that in mind, and noting that Kabocha will revert to a parathread in a few days, I'd like to set up a root track referendum that does the following in a batch (in order):

  1. registrar.deregister(2113) - release the paraid from the current holder and free the reserved balance.

<wait 2 epoch for offboarding>

  1. registrar.forceRegister() - with the pure proxy account, standard 280.3KSM deposit (see below), paraid 2113, and the head hash and validation_code at the point where Kabocha stops making blocks (not yet known).

<wait 2 epoch for onboarding - might not be strictly necessary>

  1. registrar.swap(2113,2268)
  2. registrar.swap(2268,2113)

My assumption is that this will move the paraid to the new account, offboard 2268 and onboard 2113 as parachains, and Kabocha should start making blocks again. Is there anything fundamentally wrong with this assumption? Or, indeed, is it too complex for the community to allow, perhaps?

Validation wise, we can set remarks from the accounts involved (the current manager accounts for the two paraids and the new pure proxy), to confirm intent. Is this sufficient?

About Kabocha, for anyone not familiar

EDIT to add validation on-chain remarks

Paraid 2268 manager account

New paraid 2113 manager account, via proxy

Old paraid 2113 manager account

EDIT to add notes on deposit for forceRegister()

The fee for setting the parachain PVF and head is just under 280.3KSM (this is more than the fee when Kabocha was first registered). I will use the current fee in the forceRegister() extrinsic.

image

Comments (2)

3 years ago

gm, fyi I've shared this with some folk that might be able to help :)

3 years ago

Is there anyway we can verify the account that is putting forward this proposal is authorized to request such a change?

3 years ago

@37251a3367fd402f9933fe7b3

There are on-chain (Kusama) remarks by the two accounts currently holding and one which will hold the paraids involved - see the links. The chain is stalled at the moment, so I'm not sure what else I can offer, but I'm open to suggestions.

The new lease was self-funded, so there's no issue with anyone trying to mislead crowdloan participants (the first lease was crowdloaned, but the funds have been released, and the rewards were paid out, on Kabocha, about 6 months ago)

(And sorry for the delay - it seems notifications for this post have stopped arriving for me.)

PleaseLogin to comment

Help Center

Report an Issue
Feedback
Terms and Conditions
Github

Our Services

Docs
Terms of Website
Privacy Policy

A House of Commons Initiative.

Polka Labs Private Limited 2026

All rights reserved.

Terms and ConditionsTerms of Website
Privacy Policy