It is presently impossible to sponsor a transaction fee if you are not the asset issuer. This limits teams (like mine) who issued their asset years ago, and no longer have access to the issuer wallet seed after moving all the funds from it.
We presently have a mobile wallet for iOS and Android:
This wallet is primarily targeting consumer use, however it is a point of friction for our users to have to load both Waves and our token (Tokes - TKS) to the wallet before they can transact at a brick and mortar business.
It would be highly beneficial if a non-issuer node could sponsor transactions for any asset. Any likelihood of this?
Actually allowing non-issuer to sponsor transactions with specific fee asset is possible next step to extend this feature. If two issuers sponsor same asset obviously one with the lowest price is should be chosen. Second point also not a problem. We need just understand what is demand for this and prioritize.
Given crypto is the democratization of money in its decentralized nature, yes, the lowest required price for sponsorship is chosen. (A free market approach if you will)
I don’t think the issuer needs to be informed. If someone is willing to sponsor an asset’s fee, again, it creates a competitive market which will fundamentally decrease transaction fee cost - inherently a win-win for asset issuers, and those transacting in the token.
We have an immediate need for this feature, as we are targeting brick-and-mortar retail environments for our token to transact. It’s a barrier to require all users to also hold Waves in a branded wallet for our token (TKS). We are trying to make this a frictionless as possible for users not too familiar with cryptocurrency.
imagine a situation, if a few sponsors decide to sponsor an one asset, for example they do have different rates for asset. how we should chose between them, who should be a sponsor?
If two issuers sponsor same asset obviously one with the lowest price is should be chosen.
for old assets how we will inform the issuer, that someone want to be a sponsor for that asset
and so on
On the other hand, it would really be just removing a limitation. If somebody wants to sponsor, how does that hurt an asset? It does not seem too far off from sending random people small amounts of money, which is supported by the Waves Platform.