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

Re: The case for modularizing ILP

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 16:04:21 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+ChP3eDE-XaKswEqr7LRuU7EM2T+at_QdDEr1B4360PA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
Cc: Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
On 25 May 2016 at 15:17, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote:

> Hi Melvin,
> The timing is interesting :)
> There is a lot of refactoring going on at the moment to make implementing
> ILP on existing ledgers (using the reference source code) easier and
> possible through a kind of "plug-in" system.
> Also, the website will be relaunching this week (for a sneak preview see
> the v2 branch on github) with a LOT more developer resources. Our focus for
> the London workshop on 6 July is very slanted toward developing with ILP
> (as opposed to purely development of core ILP components) and we've set
> aside the whole afternoon for hacking projects together that use or extend
> ILP.
> I hope you can join us in London on 6 July (interledger.org/workshop)
> What I think you'll find most interesting is the awesome work that Stefan
> and Evan have been doing in organising the specs into an RFC-style set at
> http://github.com/interledger/rfcs (WIP so please take as such)
> I did a presentation at WWWConf a few weeks ago which builds on the
> architecture concepts you'll see there and explains the bridge from the
> work being done in the W3C Web Payments WG and ILP (and how we are
> architecting ILP to get the Internet of Value by creating direct analogies
> with the Internet itself).
> https://www.w3.org/2016/Talks/future-payments-201604.pdf

Oh excellent!  I really hope we can find some common patterns and maybe
code reuse!  I think this is a common problem many people have and no one
really has the right answer, but lots of people getting close.

I guess one of the points of standards is to get different things to all
glue together.  I'd be really happy if we can make an eco system that does

I like the idea of hacking projects ...

> Adrian
> On 25 May 2016 at 10:28, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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:
>> Ledger
>> 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
>> payments
>> Here's also an example of bedrock:
>> https://github.com/digitalbazaar/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 14:04:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:13:57 UTC