You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
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:
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)
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
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.
Questions:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: