As part of the Executable Signed Message, I’ll be calling people that shown interest in this topic for these threads and want to debate specifics of the scheme…
I’ve updated the spec of ERC1077 based on feedback and conversations with the gnosis team. Right now, the best two references for executable signed messages are:
- Status Identity Gas Relay which has the ability to pay back in tokens
Gnosis Safe Contract which has the ability to do
createopcode, so a contract can be used to deploy a new contract.
I’ve added Gnosis Operation Type to the standard, so that it comprises both. A normal call is 0, so a contract that doesn’t want to support this option can simply leave it at 0.
I’ve also made a few modifications to make it EIP191 compatible, by request of Dan and Gnosis team and removed the nonce as timestamp thing, that was adding unnecessary complexity (feedback by @arachnid). I have replaced it by adding support for nonce 0 as a nonceless transaction which is more flexible for some cases but uses more memory.
Topics to discuss:
- How do the multiple deployer parties communicate among each other, specially if you need multiple signatures before posting the message?
- If there is a competition among the deployers and multiple send at the same time, one or more will have their gas burned and incur in a cost which will increase the price of the service for everyone. Is there a way to create a cooperation among them to prevent this?
- How to create the initial contracts? There are some tricks that can be done to save gas cost, and there are some schemes where the user can already have an account address to send funds before deploying the contract, so you don’t need to deploy to inactive users
- What are the gas costs overhead of this scheme and how can we reduce them?