Add IBC channels: Bitsong ↔ Axelar and Archway ↔ Juno

[Validatrium]

Add new relays

Bitsong ↔ Axelar

Archway ↔ Juno

[JeremyParish69]

It looks like this old channel was used, and so it may be that case that tokens already transferred would be abandoned if a new main IBC channel is registered to replace the current one. Are we able to show that no (or very few--testing) tokens has been abandoned on either chain?

[Validatrium]

Yes you can

[JeremyParish69]

Please provide this evidence

[angelorc]

Hi @JeremyParish69 can you merge this pr? The old channel is expired, we checked the btsg supply on axelar and there is only few test token there, this is why we opened a new channel instead of re-active the old channel

[JeremyParish69]

The chain order is opposite of alphabetical, causing checks to fail

[JeremyParish69]

Hi @JeremyParish69 can you merge this pr? The old channel is expired, we checked the btsg supply on axelar and there is only few test token there, this is why we opened a new channel instead of re-active the old channel

The axelar-bitsong connection isn't an issue because it's the first it's being registered. It's the archway-juno connection that is the concern

[Validatrium]

On 2 Sep 2025, at 20:00, JeremyParish69 ***@***.***> wrote: JeremyParish69 left a comment (cosmos/chain-registry#6484) <#6484 (comment)> Hi @JeremyParish69 <https://github.com/JeremyParish69> can you merge this pr? The old channel is expired, we checked the btsg supply on axelar and there is only few test token there, this is why we opened a new channel instead of re-active the old channel The axelar-bitsong connection isn't an issue because it's the first it's being registered. It's the archway-juno connection that is the concern — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#6484 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVEUL4COFO3YQYZMUDJN5ZD3QXEJFAVCNFSM6AAAAACDFID4F2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTENBWGEYTMNZSGI>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.

hi @JeremyParish69 <https://github.com/JeremyParish69> please let us know what concern do you have regarding archway<>juno connection? we have the following at our end: hermes query packet commitments \ --chain archway-1 \ --port transfer \ --channel channel-208 2025-09-08T08:02:27.385243Z INFO ThreadId(01) using default configuration from '/home/devops/.hermes/config.toml' 2025-09-08T08:02:27.386926Z INFO ThreadId(01) running Hermes v1.13.1+5e403dd SUCCESS PacketSeqs { height: Height { revision: 1, height: 11730017, }, seqs: [], }

[JeremyParish69]

@Validatrium Please show the supply of JUNO and ARCH on the counterparty chain using the old channels

[Validatrium]

Hello @JeremyParish69 <https://github.com/JeremyParish69>, please let us know how to check Juno and Arch on the counterparty chain with old channels?

…

On 9 Sep 2025, at 00:48, JeremyParish69 ***@***.***> wrote: JeremyParish69 left a comment (cosmos/chain-registry#6484) <#6484 (comment)> @Validatrium <https://github.com/Validatrium> Please show the supply of JUNO and ARCH on the counterparty chain using the old channels — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#6484 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVEUL4ELUKLMU6IAM6QWAEL3RX2RDAVCNFSM6AAAAACDFID4F2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTENRYGEZTMNRVG4>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

[JeremyParish69]

Hello @JeremyParish69 https://github.com/JeremyParish69, please let us know how to check Juno and Arch on the counterparty chain with old channels?

I believe you'd calculate denoms (which uses the channel-id) of the biggest tokens from each chain, and then query the bank module of the chains for those denoms (e.i., supply of BTSG on Axelar = ?)