I think this is a complex decision and listing the pros and cons of both solutions would be helpful.
Advantages of integration into GPv2:
- Only one system for everything: combines liquidity and can leverage on-chain liquidity.
- Ring trades allow people to buy assets with any token.
- Presumably more complex to implement?
- Amount of participants per batch is smaller but there could be multiple batches.
Advantages of a standalone contract:
- Can have up to 2500 participants in one batch.
- Last/closing order could also leverage on-chain liquidity.
- Very simple contract architecture and dependencies.
- One buyer could dilute everyone placing his order last.
- No network effect.
Am I missing something? Maybe it would make sense to start an external document (hackmd?) to collaborate on a complete list.
IMO, looking at the IDO use-case only, leveraging on-chain liquidity is unimportant, and afaik in past IDOs most used the same token for buying assets, and ring-trades didn’t add many benefits.
The upside of having IDOs on GPv2 would be that it is more likely that liquidity will just stay on GPv2 after the IDO has been completed.
Looking at the liquidation use-case on-chain liquidity becomes much more important to get the best price.