W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webpayments-ig@w3.org > February 2016

Re: On a PISP flow [Was: Feedback from Harry Halpin and Ian Jacobs to European Banking Authority Discussion Paper]

From: Frédéric Meignien <frederic.meignien@cantonconsulting.fr>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 23:23:57 +0100
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Cc: public-webpayments-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <56B27DFD.3010403@cantonconsulting.fr>
Hi Ian,

Sorry for responding so late to your comments.
I understand your approach, and I' ll try to find how I can provide an 
What is interesting with the PSD2 is, for me, the following points:
- PSD2 is an effort to open up the market conditions in which payments 
and related functions are achieved
- one of the tools to obtain this result is to create the possibility of 
an eco-system where specialized entities can exist and develop a busines
- this is clearly a way to change the game rules, today trusted by big 
and generalist entities
- thus are created service providers for payment initiation, but also 
for account management, or payment information
- this can be compared to an IT approach: today, it is not one machine 
that processes the whole lifecycle of a payment, but a multitude of servers
- each of these servers can be seen as an "entity" responsible for a 
specific value-added business. For instance, a Security Server, which 
manages a PKI on behalf of other servers, could be a 'security service 
provider" (the PSD2 does not go so far...yet). We can have in mind the 
"notaries" of the interledger concept.
- from a system design standpoint, this means that we should feel free 
to break down the process into whatever pieces we need to make it 
adapted to the future needs
- to my mind, it also means that one has to be quite cautious when 
employing the existing totemic words of payments: for instance, when we 
use the word "acquirer" today, we have in mind a whole set of processing 
steps stuck together with a glue made of regulatory, technical and 
financial considerations...which are related to the existing and 
historic context, and are not meaningful for ever ! Will this concept be 
relevant in the next years ?
I think we shall rather have a system (or the possibility of a system) 
of value-added entities: those offering authentication resources, those 
facilitating the initiation, those specialized in routing and so on.
In the same way, saying that we shall have "account management 
providers" is quite a challenge for banks...who do not see today their 
business as just managing accounts, or just providing payment services...

So, for me, what is interesting in PSD2 is this possibility to 
reconfigure the landscape.

However, I must say that I do not know right now how message flows 
should be redesigned, but let's think over the question !

Le 02/02/2016 15:47, Ian Jacobs a écrit :
>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 3:30 AM, Frédéric Meignien <frederic.meignien@cantonconsulting.fr> wrote:
>> Hello Ian,
>> I see you need a volunteer to think over the PISP flow.
>> In the PSD2, this concept of Payment Initiation Service Provider is quite much used and explained.
>> Would the idea of a "flow" be to clarify the role of this PISP in relation to other types of Service Providers ?
>> Frédéric.
> Hi Frédéric,
> Here’s our “flow” home page:
>   https://github.com/w3c/webpayments/wiki/Flows
> The exercise should help us understand the impact of the Web Payment APIs on priority flows,
> and in looking at the “before the API” and “after the API” pictures, we are like to detect issues that
> we need to ensure we address in the API specification.
> Similarly, it seems through your question that there’s a way to use (different) flows to show the world “before
> PISPs” and “with PISPs”. I don’t know whether PISPs will have an impact on all the flows that are listed on the
> above wiki page. But in the cases where PISPs do play a role, I think it makes sense to do something like this:
>    * Take a “pre W3C API flow”  and modify it to include a PISP
>    * Add it to the list of flows (e.g., “3DS with PISP” though that may or may not be a real example).
>    * Create a “post W3C API flow” (e.g., 3DS with PISP and W3C API”).
> Then we can evaluate the result and see if we observe any critical issues that the W3C API needs to take into account.
> If you would like to contribute, I suggest contacting Nick Telford-Reed and Matt Saxon on the working group list: public-payments-wg@w3.org.
> Thanks!
> Ian
> --
> Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>      http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
> Tel:                       +1 718 260 9447
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2016 22:24:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:49 UTC