# CASA Gathering #2 CAIP-25 Workshop

## Issue 1: Extensions Considered Harmful?
Current CAIP-25 handshake format:

{
  "eip155": {
    "chains": ["eip155:137", "eip155:1"],
    "methods": ["eth_sign"],
    "events": ["accountsChanged"],
    "extensions": [
      {
        "chains": ["eip155:137"],
        "method": ["personalSign"],
        "events": ["chainChanged"]
      }
    ]
  },
  "cosmos": {
    "chains": ["cosmos:cosmoshub-4"],
    "methods": ["cosmos_signDirect"],
    "events": ["someCosmosEvent"]
  }
}

Proposed new/alternative CAIP-25 handshake:

{
  "eip155:1": {
    "methods": ["eth_sign"],
    "events": ["accountsChanged"],
  },
  "eip155:137": {
    "methods": ["eth_sign", "personalSign"],
    "events": ["accountsChanged", "chainChanged"],
  },
  "cosmos": {
    "chains": ["cosmos:cosmoshub-4", "cosmos:cosmoshub-5"],
    "methods": ["cosmos_signDirect"],
    "events": ["someCosmosEvent"]
  }
}

## Issue 2: Wallet Clients Need a Namespace?

No, they don't. By the time you make a CAIP-25 handshake, you are already talking to the wallet using methods implemented by it.

kumavis:
- I think we are mixing up the CAIP-2 chainId namespaces and the "JSON-RPC feature set" namespaces.

## Issue 3: Multiple Handshakes

- CAIP-25 MUST specify what happens when the third party (e.g. a dapp) makes multiple successive handshakes.
- In particular, CAIP-25 SHOULD allow the third party to ask for more "capabilities" after the initial handshake.
- In WalletConnectV2, you can clear the current session or "update" it with a new handshake.
- CAIP-25 MUST specify how nuke/clear/undo the handshake.
- You can do this in WalletConnectV2.

## Issue 4: Session Expiry

- Should CAIP-25 handshakes expire or be able to expire?
- In WalletConnectV2, sessions expire after 7 days.

## Issue 5: The handshake is not a handshake

"Handshake" has particular meanings that may mislead people about what the CAIP-25 handshake is doing.

## Issue 6: Accounts and CAIP-25

1. Should the third party have to explicitly ask for accounts in the CAIP-25 handshake?
2. Should the CAIP-25 handshake return accounts on a successful result at all?
- Maybe accounts are orthogonal to CAIP-25?
- In WalletConnectV2, if `eth_accounts` is not in the `methods` array, the connection request will fail before any prompt is displayed to the user.

## Participants

- @rekmarks, Erik Marks
- @kumavis
- @bkrem, Ben Kremer (WalletConnect)
- @ganchoradkov, Gancho Radkov (WalletConnect)
- @FrederikBolding, Frederik Bolding
- @avivash, Andy Vivash
- @orenyomtov, Oren Yomtov
- @arikblocks, Arik Galansky
- @bumblefudge
- @pellicceama
- @matheus23, Philipp Krüger
- @alexandrumatei36, Alex Matei

## TODO

- Rewrite this into thing that can get posted to GitHub
- Invite to follow-up meeting (in addition to WalletConnect):
- Eva Shon (Filecoin)