I expected any crosschain transfer to involve some kind of pool absorbing the trade on the other side. @Dusk_Foundation CCT model skips that step entirely.

Burn & mint means the token on the sourcechain is destroyed & an equivalent amount is minted on the destination chain. There is no pooled liquidity standing between those two states no pair being traded against nothing to slip against.

Thats a different failure mode than what most bridges carry. Poolbased transfers depend on someone else capital being deep enough & honest enough at the moment you move. @Dusk_Foundation burn mint depends only on the protocols own mint & burn logic being correct and synchronized across chains.

Which shifts the risk rather than removing it. You are no longer exposed to liquidity depth but you are fully exposed to the integrity of the burn confirmation before mint happens. If that confirmation step is slow or contested @Dusk_Foundation zero slippage promise holds while something else timing finality becomes the actual bottleneck.

What happens to a dusk transfer if the burn is confirmed on 1 chain but the mint side stalls before it completes..?

@Dusk_Foundation #dusk $DUSK is going to explode more then $GPS & $STAR