Author: Jose Femenías Cañuelo 2019-12-05 20:00:03
Published on: 2019-12-05T20:00:03+00:00
In the email conversation between two individuals, ZmnSCPxj and José Femenías, they discuss the Easypaysy protocol. The first point of discussion is regarding account registration, where ZmnSCPxj mentions that registering an account would require owning or renting Bitcoins. However, José clarifies that once an account transaction is committed, the account ID never changes and you don't need to own Bitcoins if a Master Easypaysy Account is used. The next point of discussion is about the cost-effectiveness of using the blockchain layer as compared to Lightning, which requires the payee to be online at all times. José corrects this by stating that when non-interactive payments are used, the payee doesn't need to be online at all. For interactive payments, the payee has the option to specify an LN invoice and/or a bitcoin address. ZmnSCPxj then brings up the fact that Easypaysy seems to require at least 2 transactions for constructing a channel, while Lightning requires only one. José clarifies that Easypaysy accounts require funding plus a transaction for the account information itself. Multiple accounts can be funded with a single transaction. Tor hidden services are suggested as a possible contact-information protocol for Easypaysy accounts.Lastly, ZmnSCPxj suggests encoding output index in addition to block and tx index and using the Lightning encoding of identifying an output. However, José states that there is no need to specify an additional output as one OP_RETURN per transaction is allowed. He also explains that the format of the ID for Master accounts allows for up to 2048 accounts per transaction and points to page 25 of the white paper for more information.
Updated on: 2023-06-13T22:48:01.352054+00:00