agorise
/
bsips
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge pull request #8 from neura-sx/patch-2 

Worker ID added and known limitations revised.
oxarbitrage-patch-1
Fabian Schuh 2016-01-29 11:56:22 +01:00
parent d4ca4ace89 b69fbcdbdf
commit 6a31de24d0
1 changed files with 8 additions and 5 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

13
bsip-0010.md
View File

@ -113,14 +113,17 @@ In particular, the following aspects will be covered:
* GUI support
# Known issues and limitations
There are the following issues and limitations that cannot be overcome due to technical reasons:
* The percentage-based fee scheme cannot be applied to stealth transfers (as the amount being transferred is unknown, thus it's impossible to calculate its BTS value).
There are the following issues and limitations that cannot be overcome:
* The percentage-based fee scheme cannot be applied to stealth transfers (due to the very nature of stealth transactions, it's impossible to determine their BTS value).
* The percentage-based fee scheme cannot be applied to the core currency i.e. BTS. However all SmartCoins (both public and private), UIAs and possibly also FBAs (once they get implemented) will be covered.
* This proposal covers all SmartCoins (both public and private), UIAs and possibly also FBAs (once they get implemented). ~~However, due to technical reasons, the percentage-based fee scheme cannot be applied to the core currency i.e. BTS.~~
EDIT: Together with CNX, we are actively looking at ways to find a solution to this problem - one of the options considered is changing the ownership of BTS from `null-account` to `committee-account`.
* There might be a negative UX in a very rare situation: when CER is being updated by the issuer between the moment the user hits `Transfer` and the moment s/he hits `Confirm`. In this situation the user might receive an error message about not supplying sufficient funds to cover the transfer fee and will have to redo the transfer.
* There might be a negative UX in a very rare situation: when CER is being updated by the issuer between the moment the user hits `Transfer` and the moment s/he hits `Confirm`. In this situation the user might receive an error message about not supplying sufficient funds to cover the transfer fee and will have to redo the transfer.
EDIT: Thanks to [this suggestion](https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,21080.msg275323.html#msg275323) by `roadscape`, there might be a viable workaround for this issue at the GUI level.
* ~~In case of committee-controlled SmartCoins, occasionally there might be a small discrepancy between the current value of CER and the value of CER enclosed in the committee proposal to switch a given SmartCoin to the percentage-based mode.~~ EDIT: We will probably be able to offer a patch to the code-base, which makes it possible to update an asset without changing CER, and thus fix this issue.
* ~~In case of committee-controlled SmartCoins, occasionally there might be a small discrepancy between the current value of CER and the value of CER enclosed in the committee proposal to switch a given SmartCoin to the percentage-based mode.~~
EDIT: We will most probably be able to offer a patch to the code-base, which will make it possible to update an asset without changing CER, and thus fix this issue.
* If the committee decides to apply percentage-based fees to SmartCoins, our partners (e.g. exchanges, gateways etc) need to notified in advance, so that they have time to adjust their applications, and make sure those applications and their pricing policy are compatible with percentage-based fees.