There is a paper https://eprint.iacr.org/2021/930.pdf which aims to provide trustless twoway peg which I didnt see any comment anywhere
I have been commenting on Zendoo (the protocol that Darlin was built for) since early 2020:
https://twitter.com/search?q=from%3Alightcoin%20zendoo&src=typed_query&f=live
and started a thread specifically about Darlin shortly after the paper came out:
https://twitter.com/lightcoin/status/1438331490094432263
Btw Zendoo is live on Horizen mainnet now:
https://blog.horizen.io/horizens-cross-chain-protocol-zendoo-is-live-on-mainnet-build-on-the-zero-knowledge-network-of-blockchains/
I see there are some proposals like BIP-300 www.drivechain.info which sadly does not have much traction.
CTV telegram: 144 members
Drivechain telegram: 496 members
These are two of a small handful of soft forks in the running to be activated next. I don’t think it’s a popularity contest, but with that said I would ask how it is that you are measuring “traction” to conclude that Drivechain does not have much of it?
Is there any aim in the RSK community to look for these solutions and help to make it happen? like working on a new BIP or promote BIP-300 to be merged?
Speaking for myself, I have been a Drivechain proponent since Paul first proposed the idea in 2015 (the first mention on my blog was early 2016) and I advocate for it nearly every chance I get, including most recently explaining on my blog why the “miners can steal” critique of BIP300 is kinda myopic.
For the RSK community’s part, RSK dev Sergio Lerner has his own hashrate escrow proposal “OP_COUNT_ACKS” that he wrote years ago, but he thought it wasn’t good timing so hasn’t promoted it much, and anyways imo BIP-300/301 is quite a bit further along in terms of working implementation and demo software.
I think the ultimate goal should be to find bridge protocol design that is as close to trustless as possible. But keep in mind that Bitcoiners are a diverse group. Some will only stay on mainchain. Some will only stay on mainchain or Lightning (which is not as close to trustless as mainchain). Still others will use mainchain, Lightning, or federated bridges like Liquid and RSK. And still others are even willing to use things like WBTC which is a 100% centralized bridge. The current strategy, to me, is to attract the largest possible audience of people who are willing to put some BTC in the Powpeg to earn some yield or do other things on RSK that they can’t do on the mainchain, while simultaneously work to implement a more trustless bridge, not to attract the small minority of people who have the strictest security requirements but because this will help improve security for all users of the bridge regardless of their own knowledge or preferences regarding the technical details.
I would be happy with getting Drivechain on bitcoin but my personal preference is for a cryptographically secure bridge like Zendoo or a validium implementation (onchain validity proof with offchain data availability). Let’s keep raising awareness about these concepts and get bitcoin developers interested in them. The main hurdles right now imo are lack of awareness, creativity, and effort among devs in the community (or outside the community!) to bring these next-gen ideas to life on bitcoin.