Hyperlane Expansion: Connect LUNC and USTC to 10 New Chains
This proposal is open for community discussion. After feedback, it will be submitted on-chain for voting.
Summary
This proposal connects LUNC and USTC, through the Terra Classic Hyperlane bridge, to the 10 Hyperlane-supported chains with the most liquidity that are not yet on the bridge.
- Chains: Base, Tron, Arbitrum, Robinhood Chain, Monad, Polygon, Avalanche, Plasma, Arc and Optimism.
- Liquidity: about US$ 18 billion in TVL combined, more than three times BSC (US$ 5.35 billion).
- Starting point: Hyperlane is already deployed on all 10 chains. The work is to create the LUNC and USTC warp routes and configure the Terra Classic side.
- For every CW20: the Terra Classic side is built once and shared. After that, any CW20 project can launch its own route to these chains without a governance proposal or new infrastructure.
- Access, not pools: the proposal funds no liquidity. Liquidity is focused on 2 or 3 hubs; the other chains are access routes.
- Total request: US$ 32,416, approved in full by this proposal (US$ 950 infrastructure + US$ 31,466 developer work).
- Deadline: 150 days from approval, in 4 phases.
The 10 chains
TVL from DefiLlama, checked on 2026-10-16.
| # | Chain | Technology | Domain ID | TVL (US$) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Base | EVM (Coinbase L2) | 8453 | 6.15 bn |
| 2 | Tron | TVM | 728126428 | 5.55 bn |
| 3 | Arbitrum | EVM (L2) | 42161 | 1.41 bn |
| 4 | Robinhood Chain | EVM (Arbitrum Nitro) | 4663 | 1.05 bn |
| 5 | Monad | EVM (L1) | 143 | 1.00 bn |
| 6 | Polygon | EVM | 137 | 671 m |
| 7 | Avalanche | EVM (C-Chain) | 43114 | 607 m |
| 8 | Plasma | EVM | 9745 | 557 m |
| 9 | Arc | EVM | 5042 | 537 m |
| 10 | Optimism | EVM (L2) | 10 | 447 m |
| Chain | Why add it |
|---|---|
| Base | Largest L2 by liquidity; retail on-ramp through Coinbase |
| Tron | Main USDT network; strong user base in Asia |
| Arbitrum | Largest DeFi ecosystem among L2s |
| Robinhood Chain | Tokenized stocks and Robinhood users |
| Monad | New, fast L1 with an ecosystem still taking shape |
| Polygon | Low fees and a payments focus |
| Avalanche | Established DeFi and institutional presence |
| Plasma | Chain dedicated to stablecoins, focused on USDT |
| Arc | Circle’s L1, gas paid in USDC |
| Optimism | Core of the Superchain ecosystem |
HyperEVM (domain 999) was left out because DefiLlama does not separate its TVL from the rest of Hyperliquid. It is the next candidate.
Benefits
- Access to liquidity, not new fragments of it. Users on these chains can bridge in and out of Terra Classic, where the main LUNC liquidity is (on-chain and on CEXs). The bridge connects them to the deep market instead of splitting it.
- Growth for CW20 projects. Terra Classic projects can reach users and liquidity on Base, Tron, Arbitrum and the other chains, and bring that activity back to Terra Classic.
- New users. Coinbase (Base), Robinhood and Tron users can reach LUNC with the wallet they already use.
- Prices kept in line. If a pool on another chain drifts from the main price, arbitrageurs bridge and close the gap. This only works with a canonical route.
- One canonical route. Without official routes, third parties launch their own wrapped versions with different bridges and trust assumptions. That is the real fragmentation risk.
- Lower custody risk. Tokens stay locked on Terra Classic and synthetic tokens are minted on the other chain. No exchange holds the funds, and security comes from the validators already running the bridge.
- Revenue for Terra Classic. Every transfer leaving Terra Classic pays a fee in LUNC, for LUNC, USTC and every CW20 that uses the routes.
- Same infrastructure. Validators, relayer and interface already exist and are reused.
Shared infrastructure for CW20 projects
The expensive part of connecting Terra Classic to a new chain is done once, on the Terra Classic side. This proposal builds it for 10 chains, and every CW20 project can reuse it.
| Piece | Built by this proposal | Left to each CW20 project |
|---|---|---|
| Gas price of each chain in the IGP | Yes | No |
| Message validation (ISM) for each domain | Yes | No |
| Relayer support and gas oracle for the chain | Yes | No |
| Validators signing Terra Classic messages | Already running | No |
| Its own warp contracts (Terra Classic side) | No | Yes |
| Its own warp contracts (destination chain) | No | Yes |
- Low cost for projects. On EVM chains, deploying a warp route costs only a few US dollars in gas. Tron costs more because of energy fees.
- No governance proposal per project. Projects reuse the Terra Classic settings approved here instead of submitting their own.
- Already proven. JURIS (Juris Protocol) launched its Terra Classic to Solana route reusing the same ISM and IGP as LUNC, and wSPYx has a Terra Classic to Ethereum route. This proposal extends the same model to 10 more chains.
Liquidity strategy
The goal is not a shallow pool on every chain. The bridge creates access; pools only appear where there is real demand and someone chooses to provide liquidity.
- No liquidity funding. This proposal pays for routes and infrastructure only. It does not seed any pool.
- 2 or 3 liquidity hubs. Liquidity is focused on the chains with the most users and TVL, likely Base, Arbitrum and Tron. The other chains stay as access routes.
- Aggregators can route through the bridge. Cross-chain aggregators can use Hyperlane routes, so a user can reach LUNC from USDC on another chain without a deep pool there.
- Usage reviewed after each phase. Each phase report includes route usage (transfers and volume), so expansion can stop where there is no demand.
What will be deployed
| Where | What | Who |
|---|---|---|
| Each new chain | Synthetic LUNC and USTC warp contracts (6 decimals) | Bridge team |
| Each new chain | Multisig ISM with the Terra Classic validators (4 of 6) | Bridge team |
| Each new chain | Terra Classic route (domain 132556) enrolled | Bridge team |
| Terra Classic | New routes enrolled in the LUNC and USTC warps | Warp owner |
| Terra Classic | Gas price of each new chain in the IGP | Governance |
| Terra Classic | Message validation (ISM) for each new domain | Governance |
| Relayer | RPCs, gas-funded wallet and new domain pairs | Relayer operator |
| Gas oracle | 10 new domains with per-chain change limits | Bridge team |
| Interface | Registry, bridge UI, explorer and dashboard | Bridge team |
- Validators in the ISM: igorveras, tcv, darksun, burnitall, luncgoblins and bumeo, the same setup as the Ethereum route.
- Governance: the IGP and the ISM settings on Terra Classic are owned by governance, so they go through separate proposals.
- Tron needs extra work. It uses the TVM, a different address format, and fees paid in energy and bandwidth. The deploy tooling, the interface (TronLink wallet) and the relayer need Tron-specific adaptation.
Timeline and developer fee
The work takes 150 days from approval. Each phase starts after every route in the previous phase has passed a round-trip test transfer.
| Phase | Chains | Deadline | Amount (US$) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Base, Arbitrum, Optimism | 30 days | 6,200 |
| 2 | Polygon, Avalanche, Monad | 30 days | 6,200 |
| 3 | Robinhood Chain, Plasma, Arc | 30 days | 8,266 |
| 4 | Tron | 60 days | 10,800 |
| Total | 150 days | 31,466 |
Infrastructure budget
Deploying the contracts and the warp route on Ethereum cost less than US$ 9. The other EVM chains cost the same or less, so only Tron is a real expense.
| Item | Basis | Cost (US$) |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy on 9 EVM chains (2 warps + ISM) | Up to US$ 9 per chain | up to 80 |
| Deploy on Tron | 8 to 14 M energy at 0.0001 TRX | 270 to 470 |
| Initial relayer gas, 9 EVM chains | US$ 10 to 20 per chain | 90 to 180 |
| Initial relayer gas, Tron | 500 TRX, 12 to 16 deliveries | 170 |
| Configuration on Terra Classic | Fees in LUNC | under 5 |
| Total requested | Sum of 610 to 905, rounded up | 950 |
Each message delivered on Tron uses 300 to 400 thousand energy, which costs US$ 10 to 13. The Terra Classic IGP will charge this cost to the user on the way out. After launch, relayer gas is topped up from IGP fees.
Payment terms
- Full amount approved now. If this proposal passes, the full US$ 32,416 is transferred from the community pool to
terra1run9wz09uhh6pu7ggcwwetrgye4wu7wn26mawp. The amount is converted to LUNC at the price on the submission date. - No infrastructure delays. The US$ 950 for infrastructure is spent right away on deployments and relayer gas.
- Delivery per phase. Each phase is delivered within its deadline, with a public report of the deployed contracts, the round-trip test transactions and route usage (transfers and volume).
- Optional maintenance. Relayer, oracle and monitoring for the 10 new chains may be requested in a separate proposal, at US$ 800 per month.
Risks and mitigation
| Risk | Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Shallow pools across many chains | Liquidity focused on 2 or 3 hubs; the rest are access only |
| Relayer out of gas, stuck messages | Balance alerts on the dashboard; top-ups from IGP fees |
| Outdated gas price, wrong fee | Automatic oracle with per-chain change limits |
| Validator downtime | The 4-of-6 ISM tolerates two validators offline |
| New or lightly tested chains | Small round-trip test before each route opens |
| Tron uses different tooling | Tron is the last phase and fully tested before launch |
| Terra Classic settings need governance | Bundle each phase’s IGP and ISM settings in one proposal |
Sources
- Official Hyperlane registry, commit of 2026-10-15: active chains, domain IDs, mailbox and IGP addresses.
- DefiLlama, TVL by chain, checked on 2026-10-16.
- LUNC route contracts on Ethereum (4-of-6 ISM and hook), read on-chain on 2026-10-15.
- JURIS and wSPYx warp routes in the Terra Classic Hyperlane registry.
- CoinGecko for TRX and ETH prices, and Tron network parameters for the energy price, checked on 2026-10-16.
Discussion
Questions and suggestions are welcome in this thread. After the discussion period, the proposal will be submitted on-chain for voting.