Files
proxmox/docs/06-besu/CRITICAL_TASKS_PROGRESS_REPORT.md
defiQUG fbda1b4beb
Some checks failed
Deploy to Phoenix / deploy (push) Has been cancelled
docs: Ledger Live integration, contract deploy learnings, NEXT_STEPS updates
- ADD_CHAIN138_TO_LEDGER_LIVE: Ledger form done; public code review repo bis-innovations/LedgerLive; init/push commands
- CONTRACT_DEPLOYMENT_RUNBOOK: Chain 138 gas price 1 gwei, 36-addr check, TransactionMirror workaround
- CONTRACT_*: AddressMapper, MirrorManager deployed 2026-02-12; 36-address on-chain check
- NEXT_STEPS_FOR_YOU: Ledger done; steps completable now (no LAN); run-completable-tasks-from-anywhere
- MASTER_INDEX, OPERATOR_OPTIONAL, SMART_CONTRACTS_INVENTORY_SIMPLE: updates
- LEDGER_BLOCKCHAIN_INTEGRATION_COMPLETE: bis-innovations/LedgerLive reference

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
2026-02-12 15:46:57 -08:00

125 lines
4.0 KiB
Markdown

# Critical Tasks Progress Report
**Last Updated:** 2026-01-31
**Document Version:** 1.0
**Status:** Active Documentation
---
**Date**: 2026-01-18
**Tasks**: T1.1 (CCIP Selector), T1.2 (Bridge Configuration Block)
---
## ✅ T1.1: ChainID 138 CCIP Selector - RESOLUTION FOUND
### Findings
**Conflicting Values**:
- `networks.json`: `5009297550715157269` (same as Mainnet - **INCORRECT**)
- `services/relay/src/config.js`: `BigInt('138')` - chain ID directly (**CORRECT**)
**Resolution**: Use `138` as ChainID 138 selector
**Reasoning**:
1. Relay service actively uses `138` (chain ID)
2. Indicates custom CCIP implementation (not official Chainlink)
3. For custom CCIP, chain ID is used as selector
### Action Required
1. **Update `.env`**: `CHAIN138_SELECTOR=138`
2. **Update `networks.json`** (optional): Change selector to `138`
3. **Document**: Custom CCIP uses chain ID as selector
**Status**: ✅ **90% COMPLETE** - Resolution identified, needs implementation
---
## ⚠️ T1.2: ChainID 138 Bridge Configuration Block - ISSUE IDENTIFIED
### Investigation Results
**Contract Analysis**:
- **Address**: `0x3304b747E565a97ec8AC220b0B6A1f6ffDB837e6`
- **Code Size**: 1,311 bytes (small - minimal proxy or different version)
- **Admin Function**: ✅ Works (`admin()` returns valid address)
- **Configuration Functions**: ❌ NOT in bytecode
**Function Selector Check**:
- `admin()` (0xf851a44): ✅ **FOUND** in code
- `addDestination(uint64,address)` (0xced719f3): ❌ **NOT FOUND** in code
- `getDestinationChains()` (0xabc343a7): ❌ **NOT FOUND** in code
**Proxy Pattern Check**:
- EIP-1967 implementation slot: **NOT FOUND**
- Code size suggests minimal proxy or older version
### Conclusion
**Issue**: Deployed contract on ChainID 138 is **different version** than source code
**Evidence**:
- Source code has `addDestination()` and `getDestinationChains()`
- Deployed bytecode does NOT have these function selectors
- Only `admin()` function exists in deployed contract
### Possible Causes
1. **Older Contract Version**: Deployed before these functions were added
2. **Different Implementation**: Contract deployed with different source/compiler
3. **Minimal Proxy**: Very small code suggests proxy, but no EIP-1967 slot found
4. **Different Address**: May be checking wrong address (but `admin()` works, so address is correct)
### Address Confirmation
**Note**: Address `0x3304b747E565a97ec8AC220b0B6A1f6ffDB837e6` is:
- Same address on Mainnet and ChainID 138
- Mainnet bridge has full implementation (works)
- ChainID 138 bridge has minimal implementation (missing functions)
This suggests **canonical address deployment** but **different implementations** on each chain.
### Resolution Options
1. **Check Deployment Logs**: Find which version was deployed
2. **Query Event Logs**: Check if destinations configured via events
3. **Update Contract**: Deploy updated version with full interface (if needed)
4. **Use Alternative Method**: Find alternative configuration method for current version
5. **Check Storage Directly**: Read storage slots if functions don't exist
### Next Steps
1. **Check deployment history** for ChainID 138 bridges
2. **Query event logs** for `DestinationAdded` events
3. **Compare with Mainnet** bridge implementation
4. **Determine if update needed** or if alternative method exists
**Status**: ⚠️ **60% COMPLETE** - Issue identified, resolution path needs determination
---
## 📊 Summary
### T1.1: CCIP Selector
- **Status**: ✅ Resolution found
- **Progress**: 90%
- **Action**: Update selector to `138`
### T1.2: Bridge Configuration
- **Status**: ⚠️ Issue identified (interface mismatch)
- **Progress**: 60%
- **Action**: Determine resolution path (check deployment, events, or update needed)
---
## 🚀 Next Actions
1. **Implement T1.1**: Update selector to `138` in `.env` and `networks.json`
2. **Continue T1.2**: Check deployment logs and event history
3. **Determine Resolution**: Decide if contract update needed or alternative method exists
---
**Last Updated**: 2026-01-18