Skip to content

Alternative sign() payment design #23

Open
near/mpc
#768
@volovyks

Description

Currently, we have the #[payable] sign() function with a dynamic pricing model.
Downsides:

  • Unpredictable price, users do not know the exact price of a signature.
  • Each change of the minimum signature price is a breaking change.

Alternative design:

  • sign() always requires 1 yN of deposit
  • users must call fund() and attach a deposit of their choice
  • Users are charged for each successful sign() request from their contract balance

The alternative design allows both static and dynamic sign() request price models. I'm leaning toward a static one.

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions