Cross-network Settlement
Status: conceptual, last checked 2026-11-02. No cross-network route exists.
An invoice settles in a Cardano stablecoin, and the payer holds USDC on Base. The signed invoice is the same either way. The route is what changes.
The pattern
- The invoice states acceptable assets, networks and a deadline.
- Calvin finds candidate routes, such as a bridge, a solver or a provider. Each one is an external system with its own trust model.
- The quote shows every fee, the expected time and the required finality on both sides.
- The payer authorizes one quote.
- Evidence is collected from both networks before the invoice is marked settled.
What this does not give you
The protocol provides none of the following:
- Atomicity. The source side can complete while the destination side fails.
- Uniform finality. Networks reach finality differently, and “final” has to be stated per route.
- Automatic refunds. Recovery depends on the provider and has to be named in the route.
- One address everywhere. Each network has its own destination.
States a client should show
| State | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Source sent | Payer’s transaction is on the source network |
| In transit | The provider has it, and neither side is final |
| Destination received | Funds arrived, and finality is pending |
| Settled | The route’s finality requirements are met on both sides |
| Stuck | Past the quoted time. Show who is responsible for recovery |
Candidate transports are listed on the interoperability page.
Explore invoicing: Programmable Invoicing
Last updated on