3

For context: there are proposals to make RMRK https://kusama.polkassembly.io/post/1482 and USDT https://kusama.polkassembly.io/motion/470 as Sufficient assets. The existential deposit requirement is waived for accounts to hold a Sufficient asset on Statemine/Statemint (no need to hold any KSM/DOT).

There could be situations where sufficiency of an asset may have to be removed through the governance. With the current implementation of Statemine/Statemint, what would happen to the accounts that only hold the Sufficient assets, whose Sufficiency is revoked?

1 Answer 1

3

Nothing would happen to the accounts holding the assets (it would be a potentially huge storage op to iterate through all accounts on chain and check which ones only exist due to a sufficient asset). The effects would be felt though when those accounts try to take advantage of sufficiency (e.g. to pay transaction fees with the sufficient asset) or send those assets to a non-existent account.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.