CIP: Remove token filter for Hyperlane and IBC

Celestia Improvement Proposals (CIPs)
1

Forum post to discuss removing the token filter for Hyperlane and IBC. The full CIP can be found here

1 Like
2

Once this is implemented, I’m curious if it would be possible to bridge a Hyperlane token into Celestia, then out into a different chain via IBC, and vice verse? In other words, would IBC and Hyperlane be compatible with routing via each other?

2 Likes
3

The Hyperlane team confirmed that this is how it’d look like to bridge a IBC token into Celestia, then out into a different chain via Hyperlane:

Assuming this is your setup:Chain A <--IBC--> Celestia <--Hyperlane--> Chain B If you do it manually, using two transactions, you can just create a CollateralToken on Celestia which takes the IBC-denom of Chain A and this can then be forwarded to Chain B . This works back and forth.

Checking if the same would work in the vice-versa case of bridging a Hyperlane token into Celestia and out into a different chain via IBC.

4

Confirmed that the case of bridging a Hyperlane token into Celestia and out into a different chain via IBC also works similarly:

You should also be able to directly use an existing IBC channel to forward the
hyperlane/AE134… synthetic token, which then becomes are wrapped IBC token on the destination chain. The token minted via Hyperlane behaves like any other token natively minted on Celestia.

So to answer your question, yes, bridging a Hyperlane token into Celestia, then out into a different chain via IBC, and vice versa works out of the box. IBC and Hyperlane are compatible in routing via each other.

1 Like