Staking force_unbond

[kianenigma]

Currently, as a nominator or validator, your request to fully unbond can fail if you are not chilled yet.

The right fix is for the UI to detect this and batch it with a chill.

A force_unbond can help clarify this, and is not that much overhead on the chain runtime. under the hood, it would be an optional chill, followed by unbond.

[rossbulat]

Just to clarify, can this force_unbond be a permissionless call if the staker is already chilled?

The ability to remove inactive stakers from storage like this would also allow us to target those who have a unique stash & controller pair, & could speed up controller account removal.

[kianenigma]

Just to clarify, can this force_unbond be a permissionless call if the staker is already chilled?

The ability to remove inactive stakers from storage like this would also allow us to target those who have a unique stash & controller pair, & could speed up controller account removal.

Not really, this is a different concern. You might want to chill yourself while staying bonded for various reasons, and I don't see why we should prevent users from being in this state.

I personally know stakers who generally keep their funds bonded but chilled for safety.

[dharjeezy]

Hello @kianenigma i will like to work on this.

[Ank4n]

Currently, as a nominator or validator, your request to fully unbond can fail if you are not chilled yet.

The right fix is for the UI to detect this and batch it with a chill.

A force_unbond can help clarify this, and is not that much overhead on the chain runtime. under the hood, it would be an optional chill, followed by unbond.

A better solution might be to improve the checks in unbond which chills if it is full unbond. But it should never allow ledger active balance to be between 0 and MinNominatorBond.