View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0008000Talerexchangepublic2023-12-23 14:38
ReporterChristian Grothoff Assigned To 
PrioritynormalSeverityfeatureReproducibilityN/A
Status confirmedResolutionopen 
Platformi7OSDebian GNU/LinuxOS Versionsqueeze
Product Versiongit (master) 
Target Versionpost-1.0 
Summary0008000: return more information about exchange bank accounts
DescriptionWe should allow the exchange to return the name of its bank (for users wanting to select exchange accounts by bank) and also allow the specification of an order in which the exchange bank accounts should be listed (so that the exchange operator can control which bank account will be shown to users first).
TagsNo tags attached.

Activities

Christian Grothoff

2023-12-06 11:43

manager   ~0020732

Last edited: 2023-12-06 11:43

So something like:
struct WithdrawalExchangeAccountDetails: Decodable {
    var bank_name: String
    var payto_uri: String
    var transfer_amount: Amount
    var credit_restrictions: [AccountRestriction]?
}
(the order could be implied by the order in the array).

Florian Dold

2023-12-12 20:34

manager   ~0020743

Could the name not be made part of the payto URI? I don't see why this would necessarily have to be a separate field.

Preserving the order could make sense, then the exchange only has to deal with priority numbers internally.

We might also want a flag to indicate whether an account is even meant for manual withdrawal. In the NETZBON deployment, I'm not sure how much sense it would make to offer the NETZBON account of the exchange as an option for manual withdrawal. But it should still be present for bank-integrated withdrawal, thus it needs to be part of the wire info.

Christian Grothoff

2023-12-13 04:55

manager   ~0020745

It could be, and I'm not sure what is the best solution yet. We have the receiver-name already, so bank-name is certainly a plausible extension that would be coherent with what we have so far. For accounts not meant for manual withdrawal, we always have the DENY option in credit_restrictions; do we need debit_restrictions? That said, for Netzbon, all accounts are fully intended to be used.

MarcS

2023-12-13 15:08

developer   ~0020751

If users have accounts at multiple banks, choosing the 'most suitable' bank of the exchange to wire-transfer the money to is highly desired as long as SEPA Instant Payments still cost fees (e.g. my bank charges €1.50). That's also why most bigger companies have multiple bank accounts printed on their invoices, to let the payer choose.
I don't care if the bank name is encoded in the paytoURI or a separate field in the exchange account details - but isn't payto a standard already (RFC 8905)? Do you really want to change that?
Banks implementing RFC 8905 do not need the receiver bank name since THEY know how to get that from the IBAN - but we don't, thus we need it.
==> I would implement this outside of the paytoURI.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2023-12-06 11:42 Christian Grothoff New Issue
2023-12-06 11:42 Christian Grothoff Status new => assigned
2023-12-06 11:42 Christian Grothoff Assigned To => Christian Grothoff
2023-12-06 11:43 Christian Grothoff Note Added: 0020732
2023-12-06 11:43 Christian Grothoff Note Edited: 0020732
2023-12-12 20:34 Florian Dold Note Added: 0020743
2023-12-13 04:55 Christian Grothoff Note Added: 0020745
2023-12-13 15:08 MarcS Note Added: 0020751
2023-12-23 14:38 Christian Grothoff Assigned To Christian Grothoff =>
2023-12-23 14:38 Christian Grothoff Status assigned => confirmed