ckBTC is incomplete without ICRC-2. Dfinity, please don't let this drag on forever with a " bounty" approach

Before I rant about anything, let me state upfront that I’m a true supporter of DFINITY, not because I own a single token, but because I like certain unique and brave architectural choices they’ve made. However… It’s sad for me to see that DFINITY’s arguably one of strongest differentiators, ckBTC, is left incomplete for real-world B2B use cases simply because it lacks ICRC-2. Prioritization, somehow it doesn’t get prioritization. Surely DFINITY has the headcount to handle a relatively low resource work like ICRC-2, yet it chooses to create a “bounty” for it. Bounty?! Seriously?!

1 Like

The ckbtc canister is written in rust, not motoko, so the work in this bounty does not relate at all to the ckbtc canister. Besides the fact that this bounty is not from dfinity as mentioned in the thread. When you check the generic Rust ICRC implementation developed by DFINITY, you can see that ICRC-2 has already been implemented. So if ICRC-2 is not available yet for certain tokens like ckbtc, there might be some technical/planning/other reasons that are currently blocking it and are being worked on.

Without such an important matter as icrc2 &3:

  • Defi won’t kick off
  • Cex integrations won’t happen
  • Coin info listings won’t happen
  • automatic Tax report won’t happen (WHO IS GOING TO INVEST ON ICP without tools like cointrack for tax report.)

Note that there is an open proposal to enable the ICRC-2 endpoints on the ckBTC ledger.
@Mercury, I hope this answers your question! :slight_smile:


@sea-snake, thanks for noticing the discrepency wrt to the link. However, that link wasn’t intentional, and it doesn’t show in my post’s raw-text either for me to make an edit/correction. ICRC-2@ckBTC is the point I was trying to make. Apologies for the confusion.

Thx @THLO this open proposal answers my question :partying_face:

ICRC-2 is now available for ckBTC!


‘Beauty is in the eye of the beholder’