Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Filling asset Genesis metadata #35

Closed
UkolovaOlga opened this issue Jun 24, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

Filling asset Genesis metadata #35

UkolovaOlga opened this issue Jun 24, 2020 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request [RGB] Specs related to client-validated state management system

Comments

@UkolovaOlga
Copy link
Member

Designing RGB smart contracts table

Questions:

  1. Is our table compliant with CA?
  2. Do we need introduction of the timestamp?
@dr-orlovsky
Copy link
Member

I think that the issuer should have the ability to inform the market how he’d like the asset to be named and which ticker to use — and clearly not by contacting all existing registries and sending them this information directly. Genesis looks like a good place to do that

The normal workflow will be the following:

  1. My wallet connects to my (or public trusted) Bifrost server and downloads information about known assets. Alternatively, I can add additional assets using genesis as shown above (for instance taken from website or tweet)

  2. I do create an invoice with wallet UI selecting asset ticker/name received from Bifrost or imported by me. This is already trusted information, I have no reason to check the long asset id and match it against smthng. Bifrost server network works like a registry in this sense, and it takes original tickers and names from genesis - and can use arbitrary procedures to make sure they are not fake

  3. I send the invoice to the party which needs to pay me, and this party fulfills the invoice. Again, no need to check that asset is valid, since I can’t pay in the asset which I do not have.

The cases of “paying w/o invoice” will be marginal and I do not think we need to worry about their usability at this stage

So my proposal on the metadata: leave them as is.

  • ticker field
  • name

Probably, remove description. However, its already optional, and taking into account that confidential assets in liquid can have it (and commit to it), I prefer to keep it

Asset Id will be a long id (hash of genesis), and it will not cause usability problems. Ticker will be used by wallets and exchanges, but the spam will be filtered by exchange owners and Bifrost server owners

No issuer URLs, keys etc are required: again, exchanges and Bifrost servers (and some wallets) will be those who will take care of checking issuer ID as a part of their business. I assume each wallet provider will be running their Bifrost and use it by default.

@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky transferred this issue from LNP-BP/devcalls Jul 12, 2020
@dr-orlovsky
Copy link
Member

Closing as outdated with new asset schemas according to #44

@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky added this to the RGB schemata milestone Sep 15, 2020
@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky added enhancement New feature or request [RGB] Specs related to client-validated state management system labels Sep 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request [RGB] Specs related to client-validated state management system
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants