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

Re: Will ILP go live on October 1?

From: Stefan Thomas <stefan@ripple.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:11:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFpK0Q2T1=0i2L73LCjscLJ9nDz+5BM8w0fiC-krNoevb29cBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marta Piekarska <marta@blockstream.io>
Cc: Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com>, Marta <marta@blockstream.com>, Karen Slawinsky <karen.slawinsky@teambesure.com>, Yassin Mobarak <ymobarak@gmail.com>, Roger Bass <roger@traxiant.com>, Daniel Bateman <7daniel77@gmail.com>, win than aung <winthan@chomeaye.com>, Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
I'm not claiming to be an expert on Liquid, but from the public
announcements my understanding is that it is a proprietary private
blockchain solution (but based on the open-source Elements toolkit) created
by Blockstream to allow Bitcoin exchanges to move bitcoins more efficiently
between each other. Liquid works by placing bitcoins on the main Bitcoin
blockchain into a multisig escrow account controlled by some set of keys
(presumably those of the Liquid participants.)

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Marta Piekarska <marta@blockstream.io>
wrote:

> and how does it compare to Liquid? https://blockstream.com/2015/
> 10/12/introducing-liquid/
> —
> Security Architect @ Blockstream
>
> mp@blockstream.com
>
> +491703311307 (Germany)
> +14159608938 (U.S.)
> Signal, Wickr (martap)
>
> > On Sep 19, 2016, at 8:37 AM, Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote:
> >
> > Totally understandable to get confused by the names of these projects.
> >       • Hyperledger is an attempt to build an industry-standard
> blockchain implementation
> >       • Interledger is a protocol for payments across different types of
> ledgers and blockchains (it is not a blockchain or ledger implementation
> itself)
> >       • Uberledger is new and doesn't have much in the way of details
> but it sounds like it's trying to be a "meta-blockchain layer" that uses
> the same fundamentals as Bitcoin. Interledger is specifically not trying to
> unify how ledgers work but to provide a minimal address and packet format
> for routing payments through very different ledgers.
> > Hope that helps,
> > Evan
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Karen Slawinsky <
> karen.slawinsky@teambesure.com> wrote:
> > As a casual observer of ILP (and not a developer), can someone explain
> to me the difference between ILP, Uberledger (http://uberledger.io/) and
> Hyperledger (https://www.hyperledger.org/)?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Karen
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Sep 16, 2016, at 12:07 PM, Yassin Mobarak <ymobarak@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm also interested to know whether or not Ripple Consensus Ledger
> (RCL) and XRP will have any role in the transaction journey through ILP. If
> so, will we be able to notice that traffic in Ripple Charts through an
> increase in transaction volume or liquidity?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Yassin M.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Roger Bass <roger@traxiant.com>
> wrote:
> >> Stefan or Adrian:
> >>
> >> are you able to say publicly which banks will be moving transactions
> over ILP come October 1?
> >>
> >> Presumably, this means that a version of Ripple Connect with ILP as a
> "protocol switch" is already shipped and deployed to those banks, right?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Roger
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Daniel Bateman <7daniel77@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Thank you for this clarification Stefan.
> >>
> >> Is this information published on the Ripple website and/or Ripple wiki?
> If not, may I ask why not?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >> On Sep 15, 2016 7:05 PM, "Stefan Thomas" <stefan@ripple..com> wrote:
> >> What the article is referring to is that Ripple's bank customers will
> be moving real money through ILP-powered Ripple products starting Oct 1st.
> >>
> >> Note that we were developing ILP internally for some time before we
> decided that it should become open standard and released the white paper.
> For now the commercial implementation of ILP inside of Ripple products and
> the open-source work happening in this group are pretty separate. We're
> getting really good ideas and feedback from the banks using ILP and that
> feeds back into the community group work. And of course the end goal is to
> have it all interconnect some day.
> >>
> >> It'll take quite some time (and a lot of community traction) before the
> banks would even consider connecting to a public Interledger. Hence the
> importance of the work this group is doing that's unrelated to Ripple. For
> it to be a true standard there has to be lots of activity around it that
> isn't directly tied to us or our customers.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:22 PM, win than aung <winthan@chomeaye.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi guys,
> >>
> >> I just saw this news - http://www.afr.com/technology/
> nab-westpac-part-of-ripples-new-global-payments-network-20160915-grgz81
> >>
> >> Ripple has created Ripple Connect, new technology to allow banks to
> talk to each other, and is developing its "interledger protocol", which
> will go live on October 1 and provide the foundation for banks to directly
> connect their ledgers with each other without an intermediary.
> >>
> >> Is that ready to go live on Oct 1? Which ledgers are going to try out
> at live on Oct 1? Gatehub? any hints?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Winthan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Evan Schwartz | Software Architect | Ripple
> >
>
>
Received on Monday, 19 September 2016 16:12:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 19 September 2016 16:12:24 UTC