What are some guidelines on rate limits for the injected provider, avoiding blocklist?

It would be useful to have more information about the scale of rate limiting / blocklisting of the MetaMask Ethereum provider which is injected by the browser extension.

There is an article on the subject on MetaMask Support (I cannot link because I am new, but under ‘Why can a site get blocklisted?’), but this does not give a lot of information on what kinds of scale are likely to trigger such a block. The given example does not have any context as to the level of impact it was having, or how many calls/events were being utilized from it. Thus it is unclear what use cases are appropriate for targeting an injected provider, versus what use cases are inappropriate and should utilize some other hosted Ethereum node.

For context, we are currently working on an NFT project, and we would like to utilize the MetaMask injected provider to enable users to:

  1. Mint tokens
  2. Subscribe to an event that will update a live counter on the page.

We don’t anticipate that this use case would be particularly out of the ordinary for a dapp relying on the MetaMask Ethereum provider, but of course if we ended up hitting some kind of limit, it could be catastrophic for the project - it is not straightforward for many users to run their own Ethereum node.

Is it possible to get any clarification on the expected limits that dapps should run within to avoid being blocklisted? Or what scale was reached by the previously blocklisted project?

1 Like

Hey @DerilDev, welcome to the MetaMask community! :fox_face:

The rate limit refers to the limit on Infura, which MetaMask uses as an API service to talk to the blockchain. As long as your dapp is within the limits of your pricing tier, you should have nothing to worry about :slight_smile:

Here is more information on Infura:

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.