Why does a compliant stablecoin transfer still require guessing my counterparty's protocol?
機会
FATF Recommendation 16 requires VASPs to exchange originator and beneficiary data before a qualifying stablecoin transfer settles, but three incompatible protocols carry this data in practice: TRISA, TRP, and OpenVASP. Each nominally uses the IVMS101 data standard but with different trust models, inconsistent treatment of optional fields, and distinct message validation rules. A VASP initiating a cross-border USDC payment must first discover which protocol its counterparty supports, yet there is no universal discovery registry or real-time protocol negotiation layer running at scale. The FATF June 2025 Targeted Update found that serious VASPs now have to support more than one protocol because counterparties do not all speak the same one, and the FSB has flagged VASP discovery fragmentation as a key remaining infrastructure gap.
重要な理由
A universal VASP discovery layer with real-time protocol negotiation would turn Travel Rule compliance from a bespoke multi-protocol integration project into a commodity any payment corridor can consume.
機会をどう評価するか
Opportunity Scoreは測定値ではなく、私自身の見解です。どれほど痛みを伴うか、どれほど頻繁に影響を与えるか、そして今日時点で解決策がいかに少ないか。スコアが高いほど、構築する価値が高いと私は考えています。
それが現れたときにどれほどの痛みをもたらすか。
実際にどれほど頻繁に人々がそれに直面するか。
今日時点で、それに対する優れたツールがいかに少ないか。