docs: add alternative nanopayment architecture reference (vault + batched voucher settlement) - #25
Open
osr21 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
…ched voucher settlement)
Author
|
Great reference — we've extended the same project with a third architecture variant since this PR was opened. NanopayP2P (
The elimination of the server key is what resolves the attack in issue #29 — there's no private key on the server and no withdrawal endpoint to hit. Worth noting as a fourth row in Source: |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Adds
docs/ALTERNATIVE_ARCHITECTURES.md, a short reference comparing thisrepo's Gateway x402 batching model to an alternative vault + EIP-712 session
voucher + keeper-batched-settlement design (
NanopayVault, fromosr21/arc-stablecoin-dapp),
built while integrating agent-to-agent nanopayments on Arc.
Why
Both approaches solve the same "avoid gas-per-micropayment" problem but make
different tradeoffs (managed facilitator vs. self-hosted keeper batching,
per-request settlement vs. per-session voucher + off-chain metering). This is
purely additive documentation — no changes to any existing code path — meant
as a reference point for anyone comparing designs for agent-to-agent
micropayments on Arc, not a suggestion to change this repo's approach.