Conversation
Adds a CAN for the kadena ecosystem with a CAIP-2 Blockchain ID profile. Drafted by the maintainers of FAR, an open cross-reference between CAIP-19, CoinGecko and ISO 24165 identifiers, which needs a CAIP-2 for this chain to name assets that exist on it. The authors do not represent the kadena ecosystem and offer this as a starting point for its community to correct, adopt or replace. Discussion: 0xcounting/FAR#1
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds a CAN for Kadena with a CAIP-2 Blockchain ID profile.
This aligns with an identifier Kadena already registered
KIP-0017 is Status: Final and already defines
kadena:mainnet01,kadena:testnet04andkadena:developmentas CAIP-2 identifiers, deployed in wallets via WalletConnect. This PR documents that existing practice in CASA rather than proposing anything new.Who wrote this
I do not represent the Kadena ecosystem. I maintain FAR, an open cross-reference between CAIP-19, CoinGecko and ISO 24165 identifiers. Offered as a starting point for Kadena's maintainers to correct, adopt or replace.
The Chainweb question, answered by KIP-0017 rather than by me
Kadena's Chainweb is 20 parallel chains under one network id, so the obvious objection is that
kadena:mainnet01cannot address the chain an asset actually lives on. KIP-0017 states these identifiers are not Kadena Chain IDs, and surfaces the Chainweb chain separately as achainsarray inkadena_getAccounts_v1.The spec argues the same conclusion structurally: Chainweb chains cannot finalise independently. Each header commits to its adjacents, and a cut is valid only if all 20 braid. That breaks the cosmos/polkadot analogy, whose zones and parachains have independent validator sets. Mainnet also went from 10 chains to 20 at height 852,054 under the same network id, so a chain count cannot be part of the identifier. Per-chain addressing belongs at CAIP-10/CAIP-19.
Verified live (2026-09-14)
/chainweb/0.0/mainnet01/cutreturns"instance": "mainnet01"with exactly 20 chains; block production confirmed (cut height advanced 144,563,274 → 144,563,305 over 45s).testnet04,mainnet02) 404 on the same host — used as a validation property in Resolution Mechanics.src/Chainweb/Version/*.hs.Two operational facts the docs get wrong, both recorded in the spec
api.chainweb.comis dead — NXDOMAIN from chainweb.com's own authoritative nameservers (zone SOA serial 1). Kadena's docs and OpenAPI cite it throughout. I verified the network via the community bootstrap nodes listed insrc/P2P/BootstrapNodes.hsinstead, and the spec tells implementers not to hard-code a vendor host.kadena-iorepo returnsarchived: true; maintenance moved tokda-community/chainweb-node). Secondary sources claiming mainnet halted on 2025-11-15 are wrong — I measured blocks advancing.Flagged for a future CAIP-19 profile
Kadena principal namespaces are
n_+ 40 hex (e.g.n_14912521….my-calculator), and_is not legal in a CAIP-19asset_reference.%is, so percent-encoding is the only grammar-legal escape. Flagged, not decided.discussions-to: 0xcounting/FAR#1