-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 834
Add ERC: Permissioned Pull #1401
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Add ERC-A: Permissioned Authorization Object (PPO)
Add ERC-B: Permissioned Pull Execution Interface
| @@ -0,0 +1,216 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| eip: <to be assigned> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| eip: <to be assigned> | |
| eip: 8102 |
Assigning next sequential EIP/ERC/RIP number.
Numbers are assigned by editors & associates.
Please also update the filename.
| @@ -0,0 +1,216 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| eip: <to be assigned> | |||
| title: Permissioned Pull Execution Interface | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| title: Permissioned Pull Execution Interface | |
| title: Permissioned Pull |
Interface seems superfluous in an ERC title. Note: I am not an editor.
Given you used Permissioned Pull in the discussion topic on Eth Magicians, you may want to go with that.
| title: Permissioned Pull Execution Interface | ||
| description: Standard interface for executing pull-based transfers using Permissioned Authorization Objects (PPOs). | ||
| author: Mats Heming Julner (@recurmj) | ||
| discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/draft-erc-rip-001-permissioned-pull-standard-consented-flow-layer-for-digital-value/25931 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/draft-erc-rip-001-permissioned-pull-standard-consented-flow-layer-for-digital-value/25931 | |
| discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/erc-8102-permissioned-pull/25931 |
Updated with assigned number and title
ERCS/erc-ppo-authorization-object.md
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,217 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| eip: <to be assigned> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| eip: <to be assigned> | |
| eip: 8103 |
Assigning next sequential EIP/ERC/RIP number.
Numbers are assigned by editors & associates.
Please also update the filename.
ERCS/erc-ppo-authorization-object.md
Outdated
| title: Permissioned Authorization Object (PPO) | ||
| description: "A portable, revocable EIP-712 authorization struct for bounded pull-based transfers." | ||
| author: "Mats Heming Julner (@recurmj)" | ||
| discussions-to: "https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/draft-erc-rip-001-permissioned-pull-standard-consented-flow-layer-for-digital-value/25931" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Each ERC should have a separate discussions thread
|
Please note, ERCs are not for promotion/marketing purposes. |
|
Suggest splitting each ERC into a separate PR. |
|
Thanks for the guidance. I’ve split the specification into ERC-8102 (execution) and ERC-8103 (authorization), updated filenames, cross-references, titles, and discussions-to links accordingly. Let me know if anything else is needed. |
Removed the word “standard” in description
|
The commit 4c1d55a (as a parent of 4639c21) contains errors. |
This PR proposes two related ERCs that together define a portable, revocable pull-permission primitive:
Permissioned Authorization Object (PPO)
Permissioned Pull Execution Interface
transferFromunder strict rules.pull(), nonce & revocation views, canonical events, and normative execution behavior.Both drafts are aligned with the architectural analysis in RIP-000 / “The One-Shot Authorization Flaw in Digital Value Systems” and the updated RIP-001 thread. Philosophical framing has been removed; these drafts focus purely on:
The intention is for these to serve as the canonical ERC-A / ERC-B split that James and others suggested earlier:
I’m happy to adapt naming, file layout, or minor spec details to fit current ERC process preferences.