TL;DR

• The proposal follows the previously passed: Proposal: Bridge Back to the CarbonDeFi
• The purpose of this proposal is to add flexibility to the bridge used.
• This is a result of various bridges with their own nuances which make using a public function complicated and in some cases risky.
• The specific reason I am writing this now, is that there is 22.5 WETH on CELO where the easiest way to bring it back to mainnet is not via their native bridge.
• CELO vault: https://celoscan.io/address/0xa15E3295465439A361dBcac79C1DBCE6Cd01E562#tokentxns

New Bridge Function: Copied From the Previous Proposal:

• A new contract associated to each Carbon Vortex will have a new public function called “bridge()”
  • This does not include Ethereum
• The details of this function on each chain will be different to fit the relevant bridge available for this chain
• On execution:
  • Indicate amount or send the full currently available budget of the token
  • Submit a transaction to the bridge
  • Destination on Ethereum will always be the carbonVault address

Note 1: This proposal suggests no caller incentive for this Function as it is likely to be triggered by someone in the community who does not require a financial incentive - this also simplifies the contract.

Note 2: For safety, we should enforce minReturn to prevent bridge actions that “leak” funds in the process as a result of low bridge liquidity.

Update

• This proposal provides additional flexibility beyond what was covered here: Proposal: Bridge Back to the CarbonDeFi
• This proposal, rather than selecting a specific bridge, gives the right to use any of the following bridges on any chain where the protocol has value to be brought back to mainnet:
  • Native bridge
  • Stargate V1/V2
  • Across
  • Wormhole
  • Layer Zero
  • Axelar
  • Hyperlane
  • Chainlink CCIP

FOR

• Allow increased flexibility as detailed above

Against

• Make no changes