Problem: bridge config is hardcoded

[outerlook]

hey @williamrusdyputra, since you are owning more of the code of erc20 implementation, can you analyze some suggestions?

My aim here is to make sure we have tests available to cover the implementation.

I see that some actions hardcode configurations of each network. I propose we make this configurable by adding a table network_bridge_config with columns

• fee
• treasure_address
• chain_name

this should only be updated by the db_owner, and would make it more testable in ci tests and test nodes, etc.

It would be better if even the action could accept the alias as a parameter so we could call things like {chain_name}.bridge dynamically. But doesn't seem possible, in the worst case, we would still need to add a bunch of if ... else to have a statement for each chain. The idea is just to have less surface of code for fewer tests.

What do you think about this? Then we can start covering more critical parts with tests

I can take this issue if it aligns with the goal

[williamrusdyputra]

@outerlook it is a bit outside of the scope as we only need to cover ethereum on this Goal, and we just need to cover wallet balance retrieval and bridge action.

however, I do see the intention here to make it as generic as possible.

if there is any intention to strengthen the security then let's do it, but if not then let's put it in the backlog for v2.

[outerlook]

@williamrusdyputra yes, the intention is coverage/integration with tests (in a maintainable way), not too much about being generic

i.e. security tests such as authorization of each action

[outerlook]

Although I see there's currently no authorization-based action on this implementation, is this correct?

I think I got confused by the name of the action: sepolia_admin_bridge_tokens.

admin name here is not for some admin gated feature, correct?

i.e. it's always about the @caller of those functions

If that's the case, I'll backlog for a future where tests are needed (integrating these operations to TN)

[williamrusdyputra]

@outerlook yes, the bridge will only execute on the @caller