Polymer hub enables connectivity to the IBC network

@mezonquark asked on Discord:

i listened the Bo Du’s video and if im not wrong, your target chain even don’t have IBC you can transfer to it from your main chain if its have IBC while using polymer. Am i wrong?

You’re correct, so Polymer as an interoperability hub achieves:

  • Connecting chains without a native IBC implementation, by taking on the IBC workload on their behalf. This is done by our custom solution called vIBC or “virtual IBC”
  • Even for chains that do have native IBC implementation, Polymer can act as a router to ensure the entire IBC network does not have to maintain connections with every other chain, but instead can use multiple hops through Polymer. This helps the network topology scale

Game changer! Thanks for answer


Revolution on the internet


So, will there be a difference between networks that have IBC and networks that do not have Polymer? By price or speed

1 Like

There’s always trade-offs to make. Adding Polymer as a middle hop will introduce some extra latency. However, there’s a reduction in cost of connectivity overall if you don’t have to maintain IBC connections (and client updates) for every counterparty chain you want to connect to. The point-to-point connection model doesn’t scale.

So for some builders on chains that do have a native IBC implementation, it might make sense to have a direct connection with chains they expect to have a lot of IBC volume with.

On the other hand, a “virtual” chain, always connects through Polymer.

All together we get a mesh network topology with Polymer hub(s) acting as a router.


Good to hear that! I like it!


The more I learn the details, the more impatient I become.

1 Like

Can’t l2s use IBC themselves? Why is polymer needed?
I read somewhere in one of the articles about “bridges can be deceived”. Can’t İBC be deceived?

Can’t l2s use IBC themselves? Why is polymer needed?

They could, but there’s a non-trivial amount of engineering work required. Polymer helps accelerate the IBC adoption by modularizing IBC and running IBC transport layer on behalf of L2s

I read somewhere in one of the articles about “bridges can be deceived”. Can’t İBC be deceived?

No such thing as a chain or protocol that cannot be exploited. It requires a full investigation of security considerations such as the trust assumptions, the censorship resistance, code reliability etc.

It is true that IBC in general has a much better thought out architecture all the way down the infra stack that would make an attack harder to accomplish than bridge contracts.


It’s like every company that needs transportation establishes a transportation company. for the first question’s answer :slight_smile: