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

Charters 2024-03-05 #180

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 8, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions Charters.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,35 @@
# Ledger & Tokenization Working Group Charters


## 2024-03-05
[Slide deck](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xQ2P8H-7D9PRuwV57lXEiK0Wzr9isMMD7AYOOEWylVA/edit?usp=sharing), [recording](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L2lmgsyN4J3ORWVceMEOToI-XLCmTwUp/view?usp=share_link)

**ICRC-3**
* Obtained feedback from inside and outside of DFINITY
* Important, wanted to have this feedback in the standard
* Proposed change
* Remove `tx.op: text` to be more generic
* Keep it in ICRC-1 and ICRC-2 block specificaitons for compatibility with existing ledgers
* Add top-level field `type: text`
* For standard types use <ICRC_number><name>, example: 1xfer for ICRC-1 transfers
* Non-standard types: cannot guarantee uniqueness
* Backwards compatibility essentially means there are two versions
* Can we have fields that are not part of the hash?
* MP: he and security team would not like to do this; rogue machine could change fields; everything in block should be hashed
* Tradeoff towards security
* Proposed change
* Originally, `icrc1_supported_standards` was palnned to be used
* Problem: Some ledgers may not support ICRC-1
* Expose separate endpoint in ICRC-3
* Optional schema pointer for referring to schema (once we have a standard)
* The group accepts the changes
* We want to move this forward as quickly as possible
* The group thinks that another WG vote is not required for this update
* Next steps for WG
* Update ICRC-3 draft
* Let it go through an NNS vote


## 2024-02-20
Slide deck: n.a., [recording](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p6QsL8cETQ8ImPNlZggCsclzJyqKCtHv/view?usp=share_link)

Expand Down
Loading