- From: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:37:59 +0200
- To: Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
- Cc: Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+eFz_JV_4xXC88aDG=+8+X-Bj0i-4E90yRGzc6L9R6WzHskWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Michiel, Thanks for pointing out your work, it looks very interesting and I agree quite similar to ILP with respect to using cryptographic conditions. Note that the crypto-conditions have had a major revamp and the latest changes are in a pull request waiting to merge this week. I'll probabaly push draft-02 to the IETF data tracker immediatley after merging the PR: https://github.com/interledger/rfcs/pull/131 Adrian On 30 December 2016 at 17:54, Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Some people on this list might enjoy reading about LedgerLoops: > > https://ledgerloops.com > > It's a ledger federation protocol that (like Interledger) uses conditional > transactions which are only fulfilled when a certain cryptographic > challenge is solved. > > I developed the current version of the LedgerLoops whitepaper in October, > and it was actually Melvin who discovered its similarities with > Interledger. So I'm very happy to have found a community of people who also > believe in ledger federation through conditional transactions! :) > > Unlike Interledger (as far as I understand), LedgerLoops does not require > intermediaries to see the destination address of a transaction, which > potentially enables a higher level of privacy. > > LedgerLoops also goes a step further than Interledger in that it attempts > to create an internet of value where cyclical trade currents ("loops") are > not broken down into a counter-current of monetary tokens, but the entire > value flow loop is actioned using just a crypto-trigger, and no > counter-current of monetary tokens. In that sense, LedgerLoops is an > alternative to money altogether. > > I hope you enjoy reading about it! Reactions and comments very welcome. :) > > Now that I've found out about Interledger, I'll review the LedgerLoops > protocol to see where I can make it more compatible with parts of > Interledger; particularly the format of "condition" and "fulfillment" > strings can be made identical with the format proposed in > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomas-crypto-conditions-01, but there > may be more points on which the two systems can align. > > > Cheers! > Michiel. >
Received on Wednesday, 4 January 2017 10:38:33 UTC