Conversation
| the host signs locally. The motivating consumer is the People Chain lottery | ||
| ticket a participant submits while **not yet a people-set member**; members use | ||
| the bandersnatch ring-VRF path instead (`create_account_proof`, RFC-0004). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can't you just use create_account_proof if you are part of people lite?
if so why would I use that instead ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a question to runtime cc @georgepisaltu
Overall, this question seems to be not particularly related to this RFC - whether or nor lite people is applicable instead of shnorr vrf doesn't affect the shape of the sign vrf API itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am just questioning the use case inside the TrUAPI where you can either use lite or full people bandersnatch ring-VRF proof. You framed it as
participant submits while not yet a people-set member; members use
the bandersnatch ring-VRF path instead (create_account_proof, RFC-0004)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tbh I am not sure I got the question, in particular which part of this RFC is concerning / what is the alternative?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
my question is simple do we need this if one can just lite people proof instead.
if the answer is yes let's ignore my noise and resolve this
2 participants
Rendered