W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-interledger@w3.org > January 2016

Re: How do bank payments actually work?

From: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:59 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+eFz_J+iDbJ_DRw0FZiq-XUeX1ubAfesROOpVkvR+bux6r_+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Cc: Stefan Thomas <stefan@ripple.com>, Jehan Tremback <jehan.tremback@gmail.com>, Audrius Ramoska <ramoska.audrius@gmail.com>, Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>, Web Payments <public-webpayments@w3.org>
Melvin,

That sounds like great progress.

In principal ILP should allow any two ledgers to inter-operate through a
connector that holds accounts on both.
The only requirement is that both ledgers support escrow and conditional
release.

It's not essential that the interfaces to the ledgers are even the same as
long as the connector is able to prepare and take the transaction through
the various state changes on both. (i.e. As long as the connector
understands both ledger's interfaces that's all that's required.)

When you have a live ledger up let's try some interledger payments!

Adrian

On 23 January 2016 at 08:53, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 23 January 2016 at 04:51, Stefan Thomas <stefan@ripple.com> wrote:
>
>> We're working on a public ILP-enabled test ledger instance for this group
>> to play with. We just deployed the first version and are testing it
>> internally. Give us some time to work through a first round of feedback,
>> but we're excited to share it with you all soon.
>>
>
> Sounds great!  As it happens, I've been reading up on this design, this
> week.
>
> I think it may be nice, and also a good test, if my testnet and yours
> could be shown to interoperate.
>
> I agree in principle with the design goals of inter ledger, tho some
> slight implementation details may differ.  I'd be prepared to write some
> glue code, in order to try and make hetrogeneous ledgers be able to work
> together ...
>
> It would be quite interesting, imho, to see how hard it would be to get
> two independently designed ledgers to cooperate.
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Jehan Tremback <
>> jehan.tremback@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ILP has these advantages in theory. A testnet shows us how this stuff
>>> works in practice. Not a bad thing to learn about.
>>>
>>> -Jehan
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Audrius Ramoska <
>>> ramoska.audrius@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Melvin,
>>>>
>>>> I am curious what is the reason to simulate existing payment system and
>>>> to play with it?
>>>>
>>>> ILP we started to work have key advantages comparing to existing inter
>>>> ledger payments.
>>>> Dedicated intermediate company, secure communication channels between
>>>> banks and intermediate company, dedicated funds allocation... all that and
>>>> more are disadvantages comparing to ILP we are working on. Inter country
>>>> payment with such one intermediate company/solution become more complicated.
>>>> In some countries business (not bank) could buy something like payment
>>>> processing license. In such cases one intermediate company services loses
>>>> advantages, payment environment for end customer become more complicated
>>>> despite that competition pushing service price down.
>>>> Distributed ILP approach at certain level solve all these problems.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Audrius
>>>>
>>>> On 20 January 2016 at 23:03, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail..com
>>>> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Interesting post on the inter ledger element of banking.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://getmondo.co.uk/blog/2016/01/20/how-do-bank-payments-work/
>>>>>
>>>>> Im thinking of simulating this on a testnet for people to play around
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Saturday, 23 January 2016 10:42:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 23 January 2016 10:42:31 UTC