- From: Dimitri De Jonghe <dimi@ascribe.io>
- Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 13:50:18 +0000
- To: Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com>, Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADkP8CpmKG0XQ4Mx50Cz0_nJ54fkw0dP-mCY1rpT2+Led2Z01Q@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Evan, "Ledgers and connectors may require knowing the full path of a payment before agreeing to participate, in which case they could also keep a history of all the paths they have been part of." Does this imply that the sender/receiver upfront decide/know how the signature on the receipt should look like (eg. the receiver exposes his public key on his ledger to the sender?) Best, Dimi Op di 1 mrt. 2016 om 20:43 schreef Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com>: > How can you provide an audit trial which is indisputable? >> > > From the sender's perspective, the key piece of indisputable proof needed > is the recipient's signature on the receipt. If the sender has that, their > obligation to the recipient has been discharged and they need no further > trail to prove that they have paid. For other participants, I would expect > ledgers to keep a history of their transfers. Ledgers and connectors may > require knowing the full path of a payment before agreeing to participate, > in which case they could also keep a history of all the paths they have > been part of. This brings up the privacy vs transparency debate though, so > I would guess that the full path will be disclosed primarily for higher > value payments. > > -- > Evan Schwartz | Software Architect | Ripple > [image: ripple.com] <http://ripple.com> >
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2016 16:37:43 UTC