FIP-40 design breakout
FIP-40 has been prioritized into its own project due to the scale, scope and complexity which the project necessitates.
please see [FIP-40] Register addresses on private domains (access control)
Comments
Awesome thanks pawel!
I have reviewed the FIP40 design breakout and FIP. I think this approach will be effective for a general access control system that will support the many different objects in FIO.
However If the purpose of this is to allow any account to be selected to register a FIO Domain that is private and to avoid the need to perform a table migration we should probably opt for a more quick and dirty approach using existing authorizations given our current constraints; this looks like a lot of work and of course a much larger initiative.
That being said I see a lot of opportunity to tack-on additional access control functionality.
Imagine for a moment- suppose you wanted to create an application that would store some info in a FIO Handle chain address field for the user after being given permission. There might be some state data like a game score, or non NFT inventory items, etc, that can be stored in the handle but would not be a seemless experience to require the user to pay FIO and RAM where this can be done by a backend service instead. Food for thought.
@Ed Rotthoff @Eric Butz Updated FIP-40, please review: https://github.com/fioprotocol/fips/pull/305