[Proposal: 32] Pendulum Proposal to Open/Accept an HRMP channel with Pendulum and register xcPEN

XCM Disclosures


This batched proposal is to Open/Accept an HRMP channel with Pendulum NETWORK and Register Asset xcPEN


We propose to open a bi-directional channel between Moonbeam and Pendulum and to register Pendulum’s native currency PEN as xcPEN.

Primarily, this strategic move would ensure that native tokens and stablecoins on Pendulum are made available on Moonbeam’s Stellaswap DEX.

Through its integration with Pendulum, it will initially introduce a PEN-DOT liquidity pool. Future plans also include the addition of more liquidity pools between native tokens and stablecoins, including an EURC-USDT pool, enhancing interoperability between both ecosystems. The proposal also includes the Pendulum asset registration as xcPEN.

On-Chain Proposal Reference


Technical details:

Pendulum already has an open HRMP channel request to Moonbeam on Polkadot, see here.

    sender: 2,094
    recipient: 2,004
	  confirmed: false
	  age: 0
	  senderDeposit: 100,000,000,000
	  maxMessageSize: 102,400
	  maxCapacity: 1,000
	  maxTotalSize: 102,400

The on-chain proposal on Moonbeam does:

  1. Accept Pendulum’s open HRMP channel request
  2. Request to open an HRMP channel to Pendulum
  3. Register xcPEN on Moonbeam

xcPEN has the following metadata:

Multilocation: { parents: 1, interior: { X2: [ { Parachain: 2094 }, { PalletInstance: 10 } ] }}
Decimals: 12
Name: Pendulum
Symbol: xcPEN

and furthermore:

Asset ID: 45647473099451451833602657905356404688
XC-20 address: 0xffffffff2257622f345e1acde0d4f46d7d1d77d0

The setAssetUnitsPerSecond was calculated using a token price of $0.08, targeting a XCM transaction cost of 0.02$. (see here)

The hex-encoded call data for the call executed by the proposal is:


hey @annateklinska - when you renamed the title of the proposal to 36, what guided you?

Hi @turrizt
I thought it would make sense to name it Proposal: 36 because the last proposal index is 34 and there is another one with no number yet, so I thought 36 should be the next one. Should I change it back?

ah, got it. you can see that, at the moment, there have historically been 30 proposals on Moonbeam OpenGov: Subscan | Aggregate Substrate ecological network high-precision Web3 explorer & OpenGov | Polkassembly

but no worries. I’ll rename it. for future reference, it’s better to include a proposal number after submitting a proposal on-chain. this way, you will see the correct number

1 Like

Signalling my support for openning a channel with Pendulum :pray:


I am in support of this, lets keep expanding Moonbeam reach!

1 Like

Link to the on-chain proposal: Moonbeam Dapps

Ayee from my side, lfg

1 Like

Voted aye! Obviously, more channels opened = good for Moonbeam users, transactions, liquidities & cross-chain usage.


I vote “Aye”, Extending HRMP channels with parachains is essential for our ecosystem