Network Migration

Overview

Network migration can involve launching a new chain, changing chain IDs, replacing token contracts, moving state, upgrading consensus, or transferring users from a legacy network. Some migrations preserve balances through a snapshot, bridge, claim contract, or coordinated exchange conversion. The old and new networks may operate simultaneously, creating replay, duplicate-asset, liquidity, and user-confusion risks. A migration is not complete merely because contracts are deployed; wallets, explorers, exchanges, indexers, and operational policies must also change.

Teams should publish authoritative identifiers, snapshot rules, deadlines, rollback limits, and recovery channels. Payment services need deposit cutoffs, balance reconciliation, address updates, and clear treatment of late legacy transfers. Test migrations should validate end-to-end accounting before production activation. Payment systems should treat Network Migration as a controlled operational event. Deposits and payouts need heightened monitoring around activation, and confirmation policies should account for delayed finality, client disagreement, or temporary service suspension without duplicating or losing transactions.

Current behavior must be verified against the active specification and client release rather than inferred from the original upgrade announcement. Historical references to Network Migration should distinguish the rules introduced at activation from later changes that modified or replaced them.

Network Migration should be documented with its target network, activation condition, affected rules, and compatible software versions. A fork name alone does not show whether a node has activated the change, whether another chain adopted it differently, or whether historical documentation still matches the live network. Risk-control point: Network migration requires coordinated state, asset, infrastructure, and user transition, with precise cutoffs and reconciliation across old and new environments.