[MattPearce]

Yeah, the basic idea of it is faster payments + the ability to transfer to an email address/phone number/ABN. The value is in it being supported by all the various banks and being instant, so you can just log into your banking app and instantly transfer to someone's account using only their email address, for example.

Source: I work on the account resolution service that is part of this.

[eggsome]

Interesting. I am one of (what I assume to be) a very small subset of people that manged to enter their email address before there was any input validation. (my account is with one of the big four). Despite using internet banking my registered email address ends with @127.0.0.1

Would this prevent me receiving payments?

[MattPearce]

Ha, that's interesting - validation and normalisation is the responsibility of the banks so would depend on whether the bank of the person doing the lookup accepts it as a valid email address

[madeofpalk]

AND, my understanding, is richer data to go along with transactions. A shop could, theoretically, attach a receipt to payments so you can view that in your internet banking.

[MattPearce]

Yes, this is also true :)

[cm2187]

I presume the identifier is only usable to receive payments not to pull payments? Why does it need to be a phone number or email. Doesn’t it just need to be a unique string?

[MattPearce]

Yeah, only for receiving for now as far as I'm aware. As far as the reason it's restricted to certain types, I'm not sure - I'm contracting at a subcontractor of SWIFT so we're down the pipeline at the implementation end of things, not much visibility of business decisions.

[chris_wot]

I think I know one of the QA people who work in your company. You’ve done a pretty amazing job from the little snippets I’ve heard of this project!

[MattPearce]

Thanks, unfortunately I can't take too much of the credit personally as I've only been involved in the last few months of a multi-year project. Might be Brett that you know?