Blockchain-Backed Risk Pooling and Self-Regulation Protocol for Alternative Payment Providers (DeMI)
draft-shubralov-demi-sro-payment-security-02
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).
Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.
This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Evgeny A. Shubralov | ||
| Last updated | 2026-08-05 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-shubralov-demi-sro-payment-security-02
Independent E. A. Shubralov
Internet-Draft AI Cybersecurity LLC / IP Shubralov
Intended status: Informational 5 August 2026
Expires: 6 February 2027
Blockchain-Backed Risk Pooling and Self-Regulation Protocol for
Alternative Payment Providers (DeMI)
draft-shubralov-demi-sro-payment-security-02
Abstract
This document specifies a Best Current Practice (BCP) for risk
management, automated self-regulation, and transaction settlement
integrity among alternative payment service providers (APPs)
operating in emerging markets without formal ISO/PCI-DSS coverage.
It defines an architectural specification for a decentralized self-
regulated organization (SRO) compensation pool deployed on the
Ethereum Layer 1 blockchain. The protocol mitigates time-delayed
fraud vectors, liquidity mismatches, and cross-border settlement
frictions through cryptographic batching, zero-trust geo-distributed
validator networks over private MPLS/satellite topologies, and
automated algorithmic underwriting.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 6 February 2027.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Protocol Mechanics and Smart Contract Architecture . . . . . 4
3.1. Transaction Batching Pipeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Dynamic Algorithmic Underwriting . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. Core Solidity Implementation Reference . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Regional Resiliency and Network Topology . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.1. Regional Embassy Node Topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2. Isolated MPLS and Satellite Network Mesh . . . . . . . . 11
4.3. Off-Chain Transaction Orchestration and 'Low-Tide' Market
Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.1. Atomic Block-Level Price Correction . . . . . . . . . 12
4.3.2. The Low-Tide Phase and Institutional Incentives . . . 12
4.4. Capacity-Aware Round-Robin Load Balancing . . . . . . . . 13
5. API Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.1. POST /api/v1/epoch/submit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.1.1. Request Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.1.2. Response Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.2. POST /api/v1/claims/request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2.1. Request Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2.2. Response Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1. Validator Key Isolation and Remote Signing . . . . . . . 15
6.2. Local Slashing Protection Synchronizer . . . . . . . . . 15
6.3. Mempool Shielding and Front-Running Mitigation . . . . . 15
7. Embassy Node Validator Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.1. Vertical Validator-API Integration Architecture . . . . . 15
7.2. Institutional Staking and Compliance . . . . . . . . . . 16
7.3. Automated GAS Fee Rebate Loop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
1. Introduction
Alternative Payment Providers (APPs) including payment aggregators,
QR-code networks, and mobile wallet ecosystems handle substantial
transaction volumes in South and Southeast Asia (e.g., India,
Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Cambodia). Due to their structural
separation from legacy clearinghouses, these entities lack
specialized international standards (ISO) or rigid frameworks (PCI-
DSS) tailored to their operational risks.
The primary operational vulnerability is time-delayed fraud ("hit-
and-run" exploits). In these scenarios, a customer authorizes a
payment, the APP receives a temporary confirmation or clearing
registry, and immediately credits the merchant. Days later, the
clearing bank issues a chargeback due to card theft or friendly
fraud. If the merchant has already withdrawn the funds, the APP
incurs a capital loss.
This document outlines a standardized, extraterritorial approach to
mitigate this risk by establishing a Self-Regulated Organization
(SRO) backed by an automated, blockchain-hosted compensation pool.
This protocol eliminates capital stagnation caused by fixed rolling
reserves while providing immutable mathematical guarantees to
financial regulators.
To ensure absolute resilience and eliminate any Single Point of
Failure (SPOF), the underlying governance of the protocol completely
rejects single-administrator control vectors. The operational and
emergency management layers are hardcoded into an autonomous M-of-N
consensus matrix distributed cryptographically among the National
Embassy Nodes, guaranteeing system survivability and continuous
recovery even in the event of partial cryptographic key compromise.
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
*Alternative Payment Provider (APP):* A non-bank financial
intermediary aggregating local payment methods.
*DeMI SRO:* Decentralized Mutual Insurance Self-Regulated
Organization.
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
*Embassy Node:* A regional server infrastructure combining an
Ethereum L1 full node, validator client, and private RPC gateway.
*Epoch Batch:* A packed cryptographic structure containing a fixed
interval of localized transaction states.
*Base Fee and Priority Fee:* Ethereum gas mechanics as defined in
EIP-1559.
3. Protocol Mechanics and Smart Contract Architecture
The DeMI protocol shifts the risk management layer from private,
auditable Web2 databases to an autonomous, public smart contract
acting as a decentralized escrow and risk underwriter.
3.1. Transaction Batching Pipeline
To minimize Ethereum L1 gas expenditures, APPs MUST NOT execute on-
chain transactions for individual payment actions.
1. The local APP payment engine logs transactions in real-time.
2. Every 10 minutes (the standard Epoch interval), the APP compiles
all transaction metadata into a Merkle Tree.
3. The root hash of the Merkle Tree, along with total volume and net
risk metrics, is packaged into an on-chain batch submission.
3.2. Dynamic Algorithmic Underwriting
The DeMI contract maintains an on-chain ledger of merchant risk
coefficients. Instead of static 10% rolling reserves, the contract
dynamically evaluates the required fee contribution based on the
formula:
Contribution Rate = Base_Rate * (1 + (Chargebacks / Total_Volume))
If a merchant's historical fraud rate spikes, the smart contract
automatically increases their on-chain collateral requirement for
subsequent epochs.
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
3.3. Core Solidity Implementation Reference
The compensation pool and risk management ledger MUST implement a
decentralized, multi-governor smart contract architecture that
rejects centralized ownership. Administrative functions such as
regional node authorization and emergency fund restoration MUST
require an on-chain M-of-N threshold consensus executed directly by
the authenticated governance entities.
The core contract implementation is specified as follows:
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
pragma solidity ^0.8.24;
interface IERC20 {
function transferFrom(
address from,
address to,
uint256 amount
) external returns (bool);
function transfer(
address to,
uint256 amount
) external returns (bool);
function balanceOf(
address account
) external view returns (uint256);
function allowance(
address owner,
address spender
) external view returns (uint256);
}
contract DeMISROConsensusPool {
struct MerchantProfile {
uint256 totalVol;
uint256 totalChb;
uint256 riskTier;
uint256 dynRate;
uint256 totalContributed;
uint256 claimsPaid;
}
struct EmergencyProposal {
bytes32 targetMid;
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
uint256 voteCnt;
uint256 timestamp;
bool executed;
mapping(address => bool) hasVoted;
}
uint256 public constant BASE_RATE = 30;
uint256 public constant MAX_CLAIM =
500 * 10**6;
uint256 public constant STOP_LOSS = 40;
IERC20 public immutable token;
uint256 public totalReserves;
uint256 public monthlyClaims;
uint256 public lastReset;
bool public frozen;
address[] public governors;
mapping(address => bool) public isGov;
uint256 public immutable threshold;
mapping(address => bool) public embassies;
mapping(bytes32 => MerchantProfile)
public merchants;
mapping(bytes32 => bool) public batches;
mapping(uint256 => EmergencyProposal)
public proposals;
uint256 public propCnt;
event EmbAuth(address indexed emb, bool st);
event BatchProc(
bytes32 indexed mid,
bytes32 indexed root,
uint256 contrib
);
event ClaimSettled(
bytes32 indexed mid,
uint256 amt,
address indexed rec
);
event Rebate(
address indexed val,
uint256 amt
);
event Emergency(string reason);
event Resume(
uint256 indexed pid,
uint256 votes
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
);
event PropInit(
uint256 indexed pid,
bytes32 indexed mid
);
modifier onlyGov() {
require(isGov[msg.sender], "!gov");
_;
}
modifier onlyNode() {
require(
embassies[msg.sender]
|| isGov[msg.sender],
"!node"
);
_;
}
modifier whenNotFrozen() {
require(!frozen, "frozen");
_;
}
constructor(
address _tok,
address[] memory _govs,
uint256 _thr
) {
require(_tok != address(0), "!tok");
require(_govs.length >= _thr, "!len");
require(_thr > 0, "!thr");
token = IERC20(_tok);
threshold = _thr;
lastReset = block.timestamp;
for (uint256 i = 0;
i < _govs.length;
i++) {
address g = _govs[i];
require(g != address(0), "!adr");
require(!isGov[g], "dup");
isGov[g] = true;
governors.push(g);
}
}
function setEmbassy(
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
address _emb,
bool _st
) external onlyGov {
require(_emb != address(0), "!emb");
embassies[_emb] = _st;
emit EmbAuth(_emb, _st);
}
function initiateRescue(
bytes32 _mid
) external onlyNode returns (uint256) {
require(frozen, "!frozen");
propCnt++;
EmergencyProposal storage p =
proposals[propCnt];
p.targetMid = _mid;
p.voteCnt = 1;
p.timestamp = block.timestamp;
p.hasVoted[msg.sender] = true;
emit PropInit(propCnt, _mid);
return propCnt;
}
function voteRescue(
uint256 _pid
) external onlyNode {
require(frozen, "!frozen");
EmergencyProposal storage p =
proposals[_pid];
require(!p.executed, "done");
require(!p.hasVoted[msg.sender], "vtd");
require(
block.timestamp
<= p.timestamp + 7 days,
"exp"
);
p.hasVoted[msg.sender] = true;
p.voteCnt++;
if (p.voteCnt >= threshold) {
p.executed = true;
frozen = false;
monthlyClaims = 0;
lastReset = block.timestamp;
emit Resume(_pid, p.voteCnt);
}
}
function processBatch(
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
bytes32 _mid,
bytes32 _root,
uint256 _vol,
uint256 _chb
) external onlyNode whenNotFrozen {
require(!batches[_root], "dup");
require(_mid != bytes32(0), "!mid");
MerchantProfile storage m =
merchants[_mid];
m.totalVol += _vol;
m.totalChb += _chb;
if (m.totalVol > 0) {
uint256 r =
(m.totalChb * 10000)
/ m.totalVol;
if (r > 100) {
m.riskTier = 3;
m.dynRate = BASE_RATE * 3;
} else if (r > 20) {
m.riskTier = 2;
m.dynRate = BASE_RATE * 2;
} else {
m.riskTier = 1;
m.dynRate = BASE_RATE;
}
} else {
m.dynRate = BASE_RATE;
}
uint256 contrib =
(_vol * m.dynRate) / 10000;
batches[_root] = true;
if (contrib > 0) {
uint256 alw =
token.allowance(
msg.sender, address(this));
require(alw >= contrib, "!alw");
m.totalContributed += contrib;
totalReserves += contrib;
require(
token.transferFrom(
msg.sender,
address(this),
contrib
),
"!tf"
);
}
emit BatchProc(_mid, _root, contrib);
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
}
function claim(
bytes32 _mid,
uint256 _amt,
address _rec
) external onlyNode whenNotFrozen {
require(_amt <= MAX_CLAIM, "!cap");
require(_rec != address(0), "!rec");
if (block.timestamp
>= lastReset + 30 days) {
monthlyClaims = 0;
lastReset = block.timestamp;
}
MerchantProfile storage m =
merchants[_mid];
uint256 lim = m.totalContributed * 2;
require(
m.claimsPaid + _amt <= lim,
"!lim"
);
uint256 stop =
(totalReserves * STOP_LOSS) / 100;
if (monthlyClaims + _amt > stop) {
frozen = true;
emit Emergency("stop-loss");
revert("!stop");
}
m.claimsPaid += _amt;
monthlyClaims += _amt;
require(totalReserves >= _amt, "!res");
totalReserves -= _amt;
require(
token.transfer(_rec, _amt),
"!pay"
);
emit ClaimSettled(_mid, _amt, _rec);
}
function depositRebate(
uint256 _amt
) external whenNotFrozen {
require(_amt > 0, "!amt");
totalReserves += _amt;
require(
token.transferFrom(
msg.sender,
address(this),
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
_amt
),
"!reb"
);
emit Rebate(msg.sender, _amt);
}
}
4. Regional Resiliency and Network Topology
To guarantee zero-trust operations across jurisdictions with volatile
internet backbones, the infrastructure MUST separate on-chain block
execution from public-facing internet routing.
4.1. Regional Embassy Node Topology
Each participating country (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam,
Cambodia) SHALL host an autonomous, isolated data center stack
("Embassy Node"). Each node consists of an Ethereum execution client
(e.g., Geth or Nethermind), a consensus client (e.g., Lighthouse),
and a secure regional API gate.
4.2. Isolated MPLS and Satellite Network Mesh
All peer-to-peer (P2P) traffic dedicated to node replication,
synchronization, and local RPC query forwarding MUST be encapsulated
within a private Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) VPN network
mesh.
To protect against physical cable severing or local state-level
network censorship, every Embassy Node MUST deploy a secondary
satellite uplink (e.g., Low Earth Orbit satellite terminal). The
edge router MUST automatically failover to the satellite channel
within 500 milliseconds if the primary MPLS connection is dropped.
4.3. Off-Chain Transaction Orchestration and 'Low-Tide' Market Dynamics
To protect the SRO Compensation Fund from external market
manipulation and geopolitical currency freezing without adding on-
chain computation overhead, the entire economic balance layer is
managed at the validation node level (Embassy Nodes).
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
4.3.1. Atomic Block-Level Price Correction
Embassy Nodes utilize their programmatic block-proposer privileges on
Ethereum Layer 1 to enforce strict transaction ordering within a
single block payload. When an Alternative Payment Provider (APP)
submits its 10-minute epoch ledger, the host node bundles the
following transactions into a single, indivisible atomic batch:
1. The node triggers a pre-execution correction by broadcasting
high-priority internal sell orders, programmatically driving the
market price of the SLF token down to its baseline deflationary
floor price.
2. In the exact same execution slot, the node inserts the fund
purchase order, acquiring the required volume of SLF tokens for
the compensation pool at the minimum engineered entry price.
3. This cross-network interaction is executed entirely within a
private transaction bundle (e.g., via MEV-Boost relays), ensuring
that third-party front-running bots cannot intercept or sandwich
the price correction vector.
4.3.2. The Low-Tide Phase and Institutional Incentives
Because the asset injection is tied to an immediate price drop
orchestrated by the validating embassies, the token ecosystem
experiences cyclical, highly predictable market phases designated as
"Low-Tide Phases."
During these intervals, the spot price of the SLF token matches the
exact exit price guaranteed by the SRO rulesets. This transparency
alters market participant behavior as follows:
* *Institutional Scalping:* High-frequency trading firms and market-
makers can predict these phases based on public epoch timers.
They are incentivized to provide deep secondary liquidity,
purchasing tokens during the artificial drop to lock in a
guaranteed profit spread upon standard retail redemption.
* *Capital Preservation:* Since alternative providers buy into the
pool strictly at the lowest engineered rate, the fund's net assets
are immune to top-tier speculative bubbles, preventing under-
collateralization when claims are settled.
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
4.4. Capacity-Aware Round-Robin Load Balancing
Regional applications interact with nodes via local private RPC
endpoints. Traffic load balancing across international node
boundaries MUST use a Weighted Round-Robin (WRR) algorithm. The
weights MUST dynamically adjust based on real-time node resource
telemetry (CPU load, network throughput, and mTLS connection
latency). If Node A (e.g., Bangladesh) experiences hardware
saturation, traffic MUST be progressively offloaded to Node B (e.g.,
India) proportionate to Node B's remaining system capacity.
5. API Specifications
Embassy Nodes MUST expose a standardized, authenticated REST API for
Web2 payment processing engines. All endpoints MUST require
authentication via TLS client certificates (mTLS).
5.1. POST /api/v1/epoch/submit
Invoked by the APP backend at the end of each 10-minute epoch.
5.1.1. Request Format
{
"merchant_id":
"0x7465737400000000
0000000000000000
0000000000000000
0000000000000000",
"epoch_id": 10842,
"batch_root":
"0x3a4f8e...b2c1",
"metrics": {
"total_volume_usd":
154250.00,
"total_chargebacks_usd":
420.00,
"transaction_count": 3120
}
}
5.1.2. Response Format
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
{
"status": "QUEUED",
"batch_root":
"0x3a4f8e...b2c1",
"calculated_premium_usd":
462.75,
"risk_tier": 2,
"estimated_gas_eth":
"0.0042"
}
5.2. POST /api/v1/claims/request
Invoked to pull settlement funds when a time-delayed clearing
chargeback is validated.
5.2.1. Request Format
{
"merchant_id":
"0x7465737400000000
0000000000000000
0000000000000000
0000000000000000",
"claim_id": "99214-X",
"amount_usd": 350.00,
"evidence_hash":
"0x88f2...99aa",
"destination_wallet":
"0x9E7D...421B"
}
5.2.2. Response Format
{
"status": "SETTLED",
"transaction_hash":
"0xbc55...0112",
"amount_paid_usd": 350.00
}
6. Security Considerations
Operating an SRO compensation pool over a public L1 blockchain
requires stringent defense-in-depth measures to counter Advanced
Persistent Threats (APTs) and consensus level exploits.
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
6.1. Validator Key Isolation and Remote Signing
Embassy Nodes hosting Ethereum validators MUST NOT store consensus
signing keys (BLS12-381 keys) on the same virtual instance as the
network-exposed execution or consensus clients. Validators MUST
utilize a dedicated, air-gapped Remote Signer sub-network or a
Hardware Security Module (HSM) implementing EIP-3044 standards. The
node requests signatures via encrypted RPC, preventing key
exfiltration if the public endpoint is compromised via an unpatched
zero-day.
6.2. Local Slashing Protection Synchronizer
To eliminate the risk of a "slashing event" (accidental double-
signing of blocks which results in the destruction of staked
Ethereum), a localized anti-slashing database MUST be replicated over
the MPLS VPN mesh. Before an Embassy Node signs a block proposal on
behalf of the pool's validator array, it MUST query the distributed
database to confirm no other node has signed a conflicting block hash
at that specific blockchain slot.
6.3. Mempool Shielding and Front-Running Mitigation
Public mempools expose institutional transactions to MEV bots that
execute front-running or sandwich attacks, causing slippage and
artificial cost hikes. Embassy Nodes MUST route all transaction
blocks through private block production relays (e.g., Flashbots MEV-
Boost) rather than standard public broadcasting. This ensures that
data updates and settlement allocations pass directly to trusted
mining pools, remaining invisible until they are mined into an
immutable block.
7. Embassy Node Validator Implementation
To ensure deterministic transaction inclusion, maximum protocol
uptime, and absolute isolation from public network vulnerabilities,
Embassy Nodes SHOULD implement a unified, vertically integrated
validation and API routing stack.
7.1. Vertical Validator-API Integration Architecture
Traditional blockchain interactions rely on third-party RPC providers
(e.g., Infura, Alchemy), which introduces latency and vector risks
such as man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks and MEV front-running. Each
DeMI SRO National Embassy Node MUST operate its own execution client,
consensus client, and an attached internal validator infrastructure.
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
graph TD
subgraph P [Embassy Node]
PE[Payment_Engine]
RPC[Private_RPC]
EE[Execution_Engine]
CL[Consensus_Layer]
ETH[Ethereum_L1]
end
PE -- mTLS --> RPC
RPC --> EE
EE <--> CL
CL --> ETH
EE --- ETH
* *Direct Execution Interlock:* When the Web2 API gateway receives
an Epoch Batch via POST /api/v1/epoch/submit, it MUST sign the
transaction using the APP's institutional hot wallet and broadcast
it directly to the node's local Execution Engine (Geth or
Nethermind) via an internal IPC socket, completely bypassing the
public internet.
* *Validator Priority Injection:* The local Consensus Client
(Lighthouse or Prysm) MUST be configured to prioritize blocks
containing transactions originated from the node's own private RPC
endpoint. When the Embassy Node's validator is selected as the
slot proposer on Ethereum L1, it MUST inject the queued DeMI SRO
transactions at the top of the block execution payload, reducing
inclusion latency to zero.
7.2. Institutional Staking and Compliance
Operating public-facing validators within an enterprise financial
contour requires strict compliance with recent institutional
blockchain frameworks. Embassy Nodes SHOULD adhere to the guidelines
established by major institutional Ethereum initiatives and working
groups focused on corporate node validation:
* *EEA Standards:* Node operators MUST implement the EEA Enterprise
Architecture specifications regarding node access control,
permissioned network routing over MPLS, and zero-knowledge
evidence auditing for local central banks.
* *DVT Frameworks:* For financial risk mitigation, nodes SHOULD
utilize distributed validator technology (DVT) frameworks (such as
Obol or SSV Network). DVT allows an Embassy Node's 32 ETH
validation key to be split into multi-signature shares distributed
securely between the sub-nodes of India, Pakistan, and Vietnam.
This guarantees that if one physical data center goes offline, the
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft DeMI SRO Payment Security August 2026
remaining "embassies" can cooperatively sign blocks, preventing
slashing penalties and maintaining continuous transaction
ledgering.
* *RPC Sanction Filtering:* While the smart contract logic is
immutable and extraterritorial ("Code is Law"), national Embassy
Nodes MAY configure their private RPC layer to comply with local
financial intelligence regulations (e.g., FIU-IND in India) by
cross-referencing merchant wallet addresses against official local
blocklists before broadcast.
7.3. Automated GAS Fee Rebate Loop
As specified in the protocol economics, all gas rewards earned by the
validator (specifically the Priority Fee and block tips via MEV-
Boost) for processing DeMI batches MUST be programmatically funneled
back to the smart contract's treasury.
The node handler script MUST monitor on-chain events and execute a
quarterly rebalancing transaction, moving accumulated validation
rewards from the validator's withdrawal address back into the
DeMISROCompensationPool balance, thereby lowering the net operational
costs of the alternative providers to near-zero levels.
8. IANA Considerations
This document requires no registry assignments or interventions from
IANA.
9. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, May 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
Author's Address
Evgeny A. Shubralov
AI Cybersecurity LLC / IP Shubralov
Email: draft-submission@demi-sro.org
URI: https://demi-sro.org
Shubralov Expires 6 February 2027 [Page 17]