Add more detail about the differences between this design and light client protocol
@@ -200,9 +200,15 @@ Supporting a wallet assumes risk. Effort required to implement wallet functiona
- we need to provide basic functionality within zebra's trust boundary, rather than forcing users to additionally trust 3p software
- there are great 3p wallets, we want to integrate with them, just don't want to rely on them
-- light client protocol
+- What about the light client protocol?
- does not address this use case, has different trust model (private lookup, no scanning)
- -
+ - we want our first client that interacts with zebrad to not have a long
+ startup time, which a lightclient implementation would require
+ - zebra-cli should be within the same trust and privacy boundary as the
+ zebrad node it is interacting with
+ - light client protocol as currently implemented requires stack assumptions
+ such as protobufs and a hardcoded lightserver to talk to
+
# Unresolved questions
[unresolved-questions]: #unresolved-questions
