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

Deprecate SEP3 #420

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Nov 11, 2019
Merged

Deprecate SEP3 #420

merged 2 commits into from Nov 11, 2019

Conversation

@msfeldstein
Copy link
Member

msfeldstein commented Oct 4, 2019

according to our docs we don't recommend sep3 usage anymore and i don't know anyone who's actually implemented it. Deprecate it now to avoid confusion in future.

@msfeldstein msfeldstein requested review from rice2000 and tomquisel Oct 4, 2019
@leighmcculloch

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

leighmcculloch commented Oct 4, 2019

Copying over my commented from #419 (comment):

Does this mean the compliance and bridge servers are deprecated as well? The linked document definitely favors SEP-6/12 over SEP-3, but it also acknowledges that most cases will be better served by them, not all. What's the use case for SEP-3 that we might be missing here?

@msfeldstein msfeldstein closed this Oct 4, 2019
@tomquisel tomquisel deleted the DeprecateSEP3 branch Oct 4, 2019
@msfeldstein msfeldstein restored the DeprecateSEP3 branch Oct 7, 2019
@msfeldstein msfeldstein reopened this Oct 7, 2019
@msfeldstein

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

msfeldstein commented Oct 7, 2019

Unclear why there's 2 PRs for this but some more conversation in #419

@msfeldstein msfeldstein mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2019
@msfeldstein

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

msfeldstein commented Oct 7, 2019

@rice2000 @tomquisel is the reason that this was never adopted by anyone because no one had a business need for it, or because it wasn't flexible enough to serve most needs (a la non-interactive sep6)?

@tomquisel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

tomquisel commented Oct 7, 2019

I think it was lack of business need, but I don't know all the history. @jedmccaleb do you know?

@msfeldstein msfeldstein merged commit f82fd44 into master Nov 11, 2019
@msfeldstein msfeldstein deleted the DeprecateSEP3 branch Nov 11, 2019
@tomquisel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

tomquisel commented Nov 12, 2019

I was chatting with Lisa at the offsite, and she brought up how Tempo and Cowrie want to interact. Basically, they want to exchange client KYC info server-to-server, just like SEP-3 and the compliance server provide. @tomerweller and @msfeldstein maybe it's worth syncing to see if SEP-3 is the right answer and if it's worth un-deprecating SEP-3 for it? Sorry to get that thought in after the cutoff 😄

@msfeldstein

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

msfeldstein commented Nov 12, 2019

Can you tag someone from those orgs to take a look and see if they want to use this? If this would solve their problems i'm happy to undeprecate

@rice2000

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

rice2000 commented Nov 12, 2019

@tempofr Thoughts?

@tomerweller

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

tomerweller commented Nov 12, 2019

I think that by creatively squinting at sep24 you can mimic sep3. Essentially, you need to have the sender initiate a withdraw on behalf of the recipient before they start the deposit on their end. Only after getting the thumbs up to withdraw, they deposit and complete the withdraw using a path payment.

Obviously, wallets that support this flow would need to join the creative squinting. I still think it's better to have one deposit/withdraw standard.

@msfeldstein thoughts?

@msfeldstein

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

msfeldstein commented Nov 12, 2019

@tomquisel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

tomquisel commented Nov 13, 2019

I'm onboard for the SEP-24 B2B approach! It'd be amazing if we could use the same tooling (polaris and demo wallet) to support / test both cases.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.