Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Escrow document available?  (Read 536 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline clayop

Escrow document available?
« on: February 07, 2015, 02:38:39 AM »

I'm having hard time with escrow withdrawal (DVS)
Is there any document?
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline jamesc

Re: Escrow document available?
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2015, 12:43:28 PM »
I don't see one.  I think it would be here.  https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/tree/develop/docs

Offline clayop

Re: Escrow document available?
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2015, 07:07:39 PM »
I don't see one.  I think it would be here.  https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/tree/develop/docs

I'm still struggling with releasing escrow.
Code: [Select]
>> escrow clayop

[{
    "creating_transaction_id": "1b7e083af87d4a78eccb2e91fbacfa4eacb2159f",
    "balance_id": "BTSJ2KPSu7tFKW9NPXnWLs3tU6Vr6yPjz1XY",
    "balance": {
      "amount": 100,
      "asset_id": 316
    },
    "sender_account_name": "clayop",
    "receiver_account_name": "jaewoocho",
    "escrow_agent_account_name": "delegate-clayop",
    "agreement_digest": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000"
  }
]

and when I try to release it by using,

Code: [Select]
>> wallet_release_escrow delegate-clayop BTSJ2KPSu7tFKW9NPXnWLs3tU6Vr6yPjz1XY delegate-clayop

10 assert_exception: Assert Exception
released_by == "sender" || released_by == "receiver" || released_by == "agent":
    {}
    bitshares  wallet_api.cpp:744 bts::client::detail::client_impl::wallet_release_escrow

    {}
    bitshares  common_api_client.cpp:4304 bts::rpc_stubs::common_api_client::wallet_release_escrow

    {"command":"wallet_release_escrow"}
    bitshares  cli.cpp:626 bts::cli::detail::cli_impl::execute_command

What was wrong?
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline toast

Re: Escrow document available?
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2015, 08:22:15 PM »
Use the word "agent" instead of the agent name (delegate-clayop)
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline clayop

Re: Escrow document available?
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2015, 08:27:13 PM »
Use the word "agent" instead of the agent name (delegate-clayop)

Thanks Toast!
Bitshares Korea - http://www.bitshares.kr
Vote for me and see Korean Bitshares community grows
delegate-clayop

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BTS: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: Escrow document available?
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2015, 02:25:27 AM »
Why do escrows use account names and not conditions? Shouldn't each of the sender, receiver, and agent be a condition which can be a single address or a multisig condition?

Offline hpenvy2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 217
    • View Profile
Re: Escrow document available?
« Reply #6 on: March 01, 2015, 10:59:16 PM »
Why do escrows use account names and not conditions? Shouldn't each of the sender, receiver, and agent be a condition which can be a single address or a multisig condition?

Anyone?
« Last Edit: March 01, 2015, 11:01:05 PM by hpenvy2 »

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BTS: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: Escrow document available?
« Reply #7 on: March 02, 2015, 12:39:34 AM »
Why do escrows use account names and not conditions? Shouldn't each of the sender, receiver, and agent be a condition which can be a single address or a multisig condition?

Anyone?

If I remember correctly bytemaster answered this in one of the recent hangouts. I believe the long term plan is to establish a multisig condition at the account level so that any balances sent to that account would automatically require the multisig condition for withdrawal and any escrow operations done by an account (who is either a sender, receiver, or agent of that escrow) would also require the multisig conditions specified in the account to be satisfied to be considered a valid operation.

 

Google+