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

The case for modularizing ILP

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 10:28:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhLmUsmpd2L_CAPV75T1WTs2d8OgQGFULTXNmLQqFD+nVw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
ILP is a great concept, and I was wondering if we could think about
breaking it down into self contained modules.

This seems to bet the way some folks are going.

Here is the kind of idea I posted recently:

Block chain -> Ledger
Central Mint -> Ledger
Trading -> Testnet3 -> Ledger
Derivatives -> Trading -> Bitcoin -> Ledger
Media player -> Block Chain -> Ledger
Search -> Media Player -> Bitcoin -> Ledger
DAO -> Smart Contracts -> Block Chain -> Ledger
Equities -> DAO -> Ledger
Crowd Funding -> Equities -> DAO -> Ledger
Bounties -> Ledger
Github -> Bounties -> Ledger

I'll be implementing this kind of things hopefully over time via quantum

Here's also an example of bedrock:


I know that ripple labs impl. are to an extent modularized but I wonder if
we could somehow formalize this a bit more.

What would be the core componens of ILP?

With Ledger as the core unit common to most systems.  Since I think we're
almost all building via nodejs / npm I wonder if it would be of value to
think about a package manager type thing also.

Im hopefully going to create this over time, probably on a 1-2 year time
frame, hopefully more in the 1 year than 2.  Would love to hear thoughts ...
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2016 08:29:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 25 May 2016 08:29:21 UTC