5

When issuing a new asset, is it expected that the transfer of the asset to the distribution account and the locking (setting weight to 0) of the issuing account take place in one transaction or, can the asset be issued and the account locked in a later transaction, allowing for more of the asset to be issued in the interim?

5

There are no specific requirements regarding issuing account locking. It's up to the issuing entity whether to lock account or not. Master key weight can be changed at any time, thus most anchors prefer to lock account only when everything was double-checked and the asset is ready for the tokensale.

Also consider changing account thresholds instead of master key weight. If you plan to use ALLOW_TRUST operation, make sure that your signers total weight satisfies the low_threshold level.

  • Thank you for your response. While I do know that this can be done, I'm more interested in understanding what the perception would be of a token being issued in multiple batches over, say, a few months, before the account is locked. Would this be viewed as suspicious? Thanks for the heads-up re thresholds. The docs suggest changing all thresholds and master weight to 0, to lock an account. Is this equivalent to what you are suggesting? – Christopher Mills Nov 20 '18 at 12:18
  • I don't think that batched tokens issuance will be viewed as suspicious. Current circulating supply is what really matters. For example, check MOBI supply. – Orbit Lens Nov 20 '18 at 12:25
  • To lock the account you can either set master key weight to 0, or set all thresholds to, say, 10. The effect is the same. So for simple cases when you have only one signer in the account, just set master weight to 0. – Orbit Lens Nov 20 '18 at 12:42

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.