skaunov
commented
5 months ago Naming of the method is minor problem itself. There's already "Faster payments" from other places; it's good to avoid confusions. I should note that I feel like those methods highly impacted the naming CBRF + NSPK gave to this. On the other hand RF is fond of abbreviations, so everybody knows the thing as СБП (SBP). I imagine in Bisq user would be expecting Latin transcript, also it would be strange/confusing globally to use Cyrillic in the name. As nobody use "FSP" for it and most users first try would be "SBP" that makes sense to put in the very beginning of the name. Then provide additional explanation to explain the thing and dispel any confusion.
pazza83
This is a page for discussion and tracking definition for https://www.cbr.ru/eng/psystem/sfp/.
Below the line is the template filled with info. Find below the requirements assessment table. Next step is to define https://github.com/bisq-network/growth/issues/206#issuecomment-824355067?
Payment methods are evaluated very carefully before being added to Bisq. Poorly integrating a payment method, or integrating a payment method that's not a good fit for Bisq's trading protocol, can be costly mistakes for Bisq's users and dispute resolution mechanisms.
As a result, we request that you add responses to the following questions so that we can better consider your suggestion.
Please answer to the best of your ability. The more thorough you can be, the more you'll help us out, and the quicker your suggestion can be evaluated and implemented.
Why
It became the primary method for funds transfer between individuals when they don't share an institution for their financial accounts. Card to card payments are more costly and less flexible; same bank payments are on par, but quickly bumps into scenarios when both parties do not share a financial institution. Individuals-facing banks respond to the expectation of providing this method, and on average client systems encourage usage of this method after same bank. \ Bottom line: individuals prefer this method for p2p txs, especially over national bank transfer, for speed, cost, and convenience.
Region
In which areas of the world can this payment method be used? Mostly Russian Federation (RF). \ Won't be a big surprise if satellites/partners are supported too, see CBRF and NSPK coverage. Though it's impact would be significantly less there. (Actually they say there's transfers available (Cuba, Turkey ?), but it's pilot so very bank-dependent coverage and rules are subject to change for international txs.)
Currencies
RUB (aka RUR)
Chargeback risk
It's explicitly stated that there is no chargeback for p2p transfers in the system. (P2p transfers are done to phone number; payments to entities are done by QR-code and they're out of scope of this page.)
Getting money back require explicit consent from the receiver; each bank is responsible for establishing a procedure to own customers via which they can state an erroneous tx to get the info of the receiver / communicate their problem through the system / initiate a case / whatever else...
Size of user base
Conservative estimate from the top of my head would be 50 mil. individuals.They say over 70 mil. individuals. \ Most of bank account holders do have it; so you can take number of people in RF subtract those who aren't active financially, then subtract those who have strong enough issue against the method itself.Data requirements
cellphone number, processing bank (could be default or a name; for processing with default one should be set in that bank system by recipient before the transfer is sent, for processing with a named bank recipient must have this cellphone num attached to an account in the named bank)
note that receiver will see enriched info (depending on their bank system), consisting of first name, patronymic, last name initial letter, cellphone num, txid
Verification
Bank provides receipts via their system. So it can be screen-shoot, run through TLSNotary, or taken as a paper from a front office. (Again very much like national bank transfer) Some banks could provide more data in the receipt than other.
Duration
The thing is instant in practice. 18h for upper bound seems balanced and safe estimation to me.
TODO Research if there were processing incidents and what are guarantees and practice time of processing recovery.
Also it can depend on receiving bank processing/issues. (Imagine that whole system is working, but one bank is struggling; then the tx will reach the bank instantly, but can take time on discretion of that bank to reach the account inside the bank.) I guess NSPK conducts testing when a bank joins the system, since generally the method is instant; still singular bank failures/issues can be expected.
Fees
https://www.cbr.ru/eng/psystem/sfp/#DropDown4_content
Fraud risk
There's no widely known problems based on this method.
Central bank supervision and regulation of the system makes it hard to a straight-forward fraud. (Again, similar to national bank transfer.) Usual fraud which doesn't rely on the payment method itself is still present, of course.
Also it could make sense to warn buyers that they shouldn't agree for QR-code during the trade, as that's very separate part of the system with different rules.
Payment amounts
Bank-depending respecting two general rules below.
https://www.cbr.ru/eng/psystem/sfp/#DropDown4_content says "Banks cannot set daily transfer limits lower than 150,000 rubles." So it can represent daily limit at some of the banks, other can provide much higher limits, and those even can be customer/tariff/plan tailored. There's 1 mil. RUB at once legal limit mentioned at Russian page of NSPK (seems like that applicable to national transfer as well); also they still accent that all other limits are bank-depending.
No minimum was found. (Note that 0,01 is the smallest denomination of RUB; and generally it's not relevant.)
Payment description
Generally offered, though it's bank-dependent. Seems that national bank transfer rules (and reasoning behind them) could be applied here. (Current rule is to leave blank or put either " " or "-" when impossible. Some banks fill the empty narrative with their template e.g. monetary assets transfer.)