-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Problem / Underpaid Invoices #8
Comments
On the buyer side, if they pay from an exchange for the second time, the invoice can in that case also remain
This is a big issue for merchants as well. Imagine a buyer bombarding you with transactions, it will cost you way more to move those funds later. In BTCPay we add a protection mechanism for merchant called the network fee, which isn't the same as miner's fee. Check this. This is on by default on the second transaction. So if you underpay an invoice, your second transaction includes due + network fee which protects the merchant. So overall a big issue which increases the cost for everyone.
Until it gets paid. If the invoice timer (usually 15 min) expires, and invoice gets paid afterwards, for merchant his invoice is marked
Direct feedback from a merchant dealing with digital items:
|
I agree with @pavlenex & bk that paying from exchange is the most common problem here. because of the added network fee.. which to a end user they now they hear of two fees, ie mining fee, then network fee.. underpaid. overpaid. non SegWit wallet issue, and certain wallets with incorrect fees, can change a dollar.. to 99 cents, so if all these problems can be sorted without the end user having to learn even more stuff on top of what they are learning.. also this has come up quite a few times.. but not so often over the three years in support some good info has been provided here already so I guess the real problem is with wallets and transfer .. I find mempool space to give the best idea of a next bock fee, for bitcoin, many wallets seem to have a big delay with fee estimation .. which results in more fees paid than should be.. or a low fee the takes forever to confirm.. so like waiting for a bus... all you need to know is the timetable, and the fare to pay. I find btcpay hot wallet to be quite great a getting a low fee and fast block times correct quite well.. much better than other wallets I play with for testing out!! the UX is all I care about... their are many wallets I stopped using because of bad UX. etc etc https://github.com/btcpayserver/btcpayserver/search?q=underpaid+invoice over all I see 9 issues posted.. |
would be nice to maybe talk more about the best wallet UX experience .. in other GitHub issue!! if you guys wanna open it.. I happy to join in the discussion |
I agree with this Buyer paying from multiple outputs means that the fee for a merchant who needs to move those funds later will be higher. Solution: Educating both users and exchanges about the potential setbacks when paying directly from an exchange. Exchanges should communicate more transparently and clearer in their UI if they’re deducting a fee from the total. |
Correct!! I never seen a underpaid or overpaid invoice via lightning. |
@johnsBeharry Correct, since the amount is hard-coded into an invoice, this isn't a problem. Though, I can't remember on top of my mind the implementation and the specific wallet that allows modifing the amount in the UI (could be c-lightning, but not 100% sure), it was quite a while ago. |
Discussion to @pavlenex write up on problems dealing with merchants.
Accepting bitcoin in a merchant use case doesn't seem so straight forward as giving out a bitcoin address. Thats where the bitcoin merchant invoice comes in.
Scenario: Paying from an exchange leads to underpaid invoice
On the buyer side they can only solve this by making multiple payments to the invoice (at least 2).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: