Universal WTON initiative and how we make TON better together

Article image

Hello guys, it's been more than a month since I've gotten involved in the Wrapped TON initiative and I'm sharing with you some overview as well as my thoughts on it.

If you are familiar with FunC programming or aim to start on this path - this will be very interesting for you from both technical and community perspective. To follow up with the latest news on Universal WTON, please have a look at this TEP: ton-blockchain/TEPs#102

I would like to address this article to newcomers in TON as well as experienced developers, so here is the agenda:

  1. What is WTON and why bother to even have it?
  2. How do community initiatives work in TON?
  3. Current suggested Universal WTON standard
  4. Fresh new input from TON core team on the WTON
  5. Call to action to take part in the discussion

Are you ready? Let's jump in!

Interaction with different kinds of assets require additional conditional logic. To avoid that and unify interaction between TON and jettons of TEP-74 and TEP-89 standards, we introduce a concept of WTON - a jetton that is locking TON 1-to-1 on mint and releases TON on burn.

Implementation of a wrapped TON contract doesn't require a lot of effort. As a matter of fact, several implementations already exist. The problem is that numerous different wrapped TONs (wTON, jTON etc) created by different developers bare lots of risks:

  • Financial risks: there is no guarantee that a particular WTON doesn't hold security vulnerabilities left deliberately or by mistake. Getting security audits and certifications of the same quality for all the many WTONs is unrealistic.
  • Ecosystem fragmentation and no single API: this is a real problem for developers who are building products that will have to use a variety of WTONs. Imagine a wallet developer who wants to correctly display the total amount of WTON, including regular and all kinds of wrapped ones.
  • No parity of features: each WTON will have its own unique set of features, which will lead to additional issues with support.

While working with Universal WTON I got familiar with a number of great tools, that enable any builder to make impact. Let me explain.

TEPs (TON Enhancement Proposals).

The main goal of TON Enhancement Proposals is to provide a convenient and formal way to propose changes to TON Blockchain and standardize ways of interaction between different parts of ecosystem. Proposal management is done using GitHub pull requests, the process is described formally in TEP-1.

Here is a simple list of steps to use the TEP instrument:

  1. Discuss your proposal with community first, for example in TON Dev chat (en/ru).
  2. Read TEP-1 to understand proposal management process and follow the guideline.
  3. Submit a pull request.

The TON Footsteps

TON Footsteps is another cool instrument that can help you to fund your initiative. It's run similarly to TEPs. You can go the official TON Footsteps repository, propose your initiative according to guidlines and let the community support you on this path.

Based on the analysis of your initiative and the level of support from the community, the TON Footsteps committee will decide whether to accept and fund it. I find it very cool, that such initiative allows anybody to take part in shaping TON and improving it.

So, to sum up - The Universal WTON initiative was funded by TON Footsteps and is run through official TON Enhancement Proposals repository.

As the first step of TEPs usages states, we've discussed the WTON proposal with the community. With help of guys from TON Foundation and FS Labs we've gathered representatives from all major existing DEXs (Decentralized Exchange) developers and started a solid discussion on how to implement WTON in the most effecient way. Following is what we came up with.

You should definitely consider looking into the actual TEP Pull Request, as it has much more detailed explanation along with specifications, solution drawbacks and alternatives.

As mentioned above, the universal WTON has a single source of origin, a deployed minter contract that has no owner/admin functinalities.

Two core functionalities of WTON are wrapping and unwrapping TON.


In order to wrap WTON, send a mint operation code with a message. WTON minter will reserve amount + minimal_balance() TON on the minter contract and will send the rest to a WTON wallet of recipient within internal_transfer message.

One of the most important things is the ability to attach forward_amount and forward_payload to build a pipeline of transactions.

The message should be rejected if:

  • msg_value is less than amount + forward_amount + gas_fee
  • recipient is in different workchain than the minter


In order to unwrap WTON jettons back to TON, burn operation code should be used.

Our deployed implementation relies on existing operation burn (including custom_payload) but uses a new operation burn_notification_ext instead of burn_notification. The only reason for replacing burn_notification by a new burn_notification_ext is inability to attach a custom_payload.

After burning, a jetton wallet sends burn_notification_ext to a minter. As soon as WTON minter receives burn_notification_ext message, it decreases total_supply by amount, reserves total_supply + minimal_balance() and sends a message with release operation code to response_destination attaching the rest of TON and optional custom_payload.

The message with burn operation should be rejected if:

  • response_destination is not specified
  • amount is less than jetton balance of jetton wallet
  • msg_sender is not an owner of jetton wallet
  • msg_value is not enough for handling both messages burn and burn_notification_ext

Here we expereince the power of the TEP tool, as all the proposals there are regularly reviewed by the core team and so was our proposal.

After some waiting time, we've received a fresh new idea from Ston.fi developer Dario and EmelyanenkoK - this one of the core team developers as we can see on the commits to the main TON monorepo. EmelyanenkoK also implemented a draft solution, that can help one better understand the overall idea.

I will briefly explain the new inputs here, but you should definitely go into the the actual TEP Pull Request and follow along with the discussion.

To sum up the idea, i will quote the EmelyanenkoK's message on the PR:

I want to emphasize some aspects of @dariotarantini proposal: 1.each wTON wallet works as minter/burner itself - no need for additional interaction with minter which means one or even two transaction shorter paths 2.we can reformulate this scheme in the following terms: in original proposal when we want to send TONs we actually send IOU jettons which is redeemable as TON, but in scheme proposed by Dario we send TON themselves but disguised as jetton transfer for compatibility.

This example shows that some great ideas can be derived as a result of collaboration.

So now, after getting such solid input from both the core team and community members, we are going to proceed with discussions on the details of how this should be applied on Universal WTON.

I want to invite you to participate in this discussion. In my opinion, this is the best way to better understand TON, as it is community driven and holds the potential for the best working solution.

Follow the link and let us know what you think!

Written by Mark Okhman To stay in touch, please follow my Telegram and YouTube channels.