port prefix check on the ICA host prevents the implementation of a controller directly into a smart contract

[charleenfei]

Summary

context from user on Discord:

...in the ICA spec, the controller port has to be prefixed with 'ica-controller'. If this prefix requirement wouldn't be there, it's quite straightforward to write a cosmwasm contract that can connect to an icahost without the need for an ica controller on the controller chain.

Problem Definition

Proposal

we should be able to remove the check on host side without significantly affecting security properties. considerations were around accidental name collisions, iteration on port identifiers within a given namespace.

---

For Admin Use

• Not duplicate issue
• Appropriate labels applied
• Appropriate contributors tagged/assigned

[ethanfrey]

I fully support this, we should be port agnostic as much as possible.

There was the same issue with ibctransfer module before that would only connect to transfer port on the other side. See cosmos/ibc#463