Persistence Team,
We agree that IBC is critical and require professional support from reliable operators for optimal user experience. Also in agreement that general incentives to run IBC at large scale is typically a significant expense that validators bear in order to support cosmos network. We also recognize CryptoCrew as an exceptional relayer operator with strong track record. I have nothing but huge respect and praise for CryptoCrew
Now in order to incentivize relayer with SLA and monitoring, I recommend few points:
- Work with top 2-3 relayer operators for Persistence based on total volume for 2023 (including Architect Nodes).
- If relayer is willing to support IBC with SLA/monitoring requirements, then give them opportunity to run relayer for channels they can support.
- If a relayer doesn’t want to support some channels, keep going down the list until you can find someone who can.
- Offer same terms to all relayers, so it’s fair and competitive. I agree with the terms laid out for Infrastructure cost and tx fees as laid out by CryptoCrew.
- Don’t put all your eggs in one basket (it’s not about CryptoCrew, they are awesome
, but a good business practice).
In the end, Architect Nodes has been supporting Persistence for a long time as reflected by yearly relayer numbers shared by paranormal here:
We can provide same level of service like redundant nodes in different geographical regions, monitoring/SLA and support as mentioned in original doc and would love to work with Persistence team. Our relayer infrastructure cover over 20 cosmos chains and we are always expanding our coverage. It is about time we recognize effort and time relayers put in order to support IBC, and provide them with required support to sustain their operations.
I look forward to feedback and working with Persistence team.
cc: @dneorej @ccvalidators
Architect