[EPROD-1037] Remove icx-proxy

[ufoscout]

Issue ticket

Issue ticket link:

Checklist before requesting a review

Code conventions

• I have performed a self-review of my code
• Every new function is documented
• Object names are auto explicative
• The PR follows the project conventions
• The code follows the style guidelines of the project
• The code follows the project security best practices

Security

• The PR does not break APIs backward compatibility
• The PR does not break the stable storage backward compatibility

Testing

• Every function is properly unit tested
• I have added integration tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• IC endpoints are always tested through the canister_call! macro

[Maximkaaa]

Hmmm.... If we remove icx-proxy, we cannot use hardhat to deploy contracts to a local EVM. It might be possible with forge, but I would say it's nice to have a simple way for existing EVM tooling to connect to a local EVM deployed in dfx IC. Is there a reason we want to remove this, or is it just for a cleanup?

[ufoscout]

Hmmm.... If we remove icx-proxy, we cannot use hardhat to deploy contracts to a local EVM. It might be possible with forge, but I would say it's nice to have a simple way for existing EVM tooling to connect to a local EVM deployed in dfx IC. Is there a reason we want to remove this, or is it just for a cleanup?

@Maximkaaa There's no real advantage in removing it. However, the icx-proxy project is deprecated and the dfinity foundation advises not to use it anymore. Luckily, the latest dfx version contains a webserver that offers part of the icx-proxy features, this is enough for most of our needs. Nevertheless, before merging this PR, I will investigate with @itsyaasir whether the new webserver can be used for local deployment of the BftBridge with Hardhat or Forge.