W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-interledger@w3.org > November 2018

Re: Researching to leverage Hashed-Timelock Agreements (HTLAs) paradigm for establishing atomicity between different DLT networks for asset swaps with full decentralization

From: Nathan Aw <nathan.mk.aw@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2018 23:35:15 +0800
Message-ID: <CA+p-ctaJESaLeSZHE+oAa4=br9xsCTpY2xfwF=WgsEdJHZ5jPg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com>
Cc: public-interledger@w3.org, ledger@ietf.org
Hi Evan,

Would like to quickly check with you on the questions below. Thanks!

1. Do you need that whole transaction to happen atomically or for the
balances to just end up that way?
    Nathan Aw: Probably the latter? Might be possible to have the different
transactions to happen atomically?

2. Also, do you need every party to maintain their own view of the state of
the balances, or is there a single central party that could track them?
    Nathan Aw: Ideally no central party. the decentralized network should
be and ideally be intelligent enough to identify these gridlocks and
address them automatically,          perhaps with the help of some
configuration?

Are there any of such capabilities in the roadmap?

Regards,

Nathan Aw

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 11:31 PM Nathan Aw <nathan.mk.aw@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Evan,
>
> Have provided my response below. Thanks!
>
> 1. Do you need that whole transaction to happen atomically or for the
> balances to just end up that way?
>     Nathan Aw: Probably the latter? Might be possible to have the
> different transactions to happen atomically?
>
> 2. Also, do you need every party to maintain their own view of the state
> of the balances, or is there a single central party that could track them?
>     Nathan Aw: Ideally no central party. the decentralized network should
> be and ideally be intelligent enough to identify these gridlocks and
> address them automatically,          perhaps with the help of some
> configuration?
>
> Are there any of such capabilities in the roadmap?
>
> Thank you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nathan Aw
> https://sg.linkedin.com/in/awnathan
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/103/materials/slides-103-dinrg-decentralized-identity-01
> https://www.hyperledger.org/news/speakersbureau
> https://erc725alliance.org/
> https://www.hyperledger.org/community/technical-ambassador
> https://www.meetup.com/BlockChain-Dapps-Technology/events/254556114/
>
> https://www.hyperledger.org/blog/2017/12/05/developer-showcase-series-nathan-aw-ntt-data
> https://www.meetup.com/Hyperledger-HK/events/248011521/
> https://blockchain.ieee.org/newsletter/editorial-board
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 2:58 AM Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nathan,
>>
>> Do you need that whole transaction to happen atomically or for the
>> balances to just end up that way? Also, do you need every party to maintain
>> their own view of the state of the balances, or is there a single central
>> party that could track them?
>>
>> On Nov 7 2018, at 9:03 am, Nathan Aw <nathan.mk.aw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Evan,
>>
>> I came up with a gridlock diagram/scenario to illustrate what I wish to
>> hope to solve (or perhaps build) with interledger. Please refer to the
>> gridlock diagram below. Since interledger is the routing layer/network, the
>> gridlock mechanism is something that will be extremely relevant. This
>> mechanism will be a game-changer -- any thoughts/inputs, please?
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Nathan Aw
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/awnathan/
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/103/materials/slides-103-dinrg-decentralized-identity-00
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 12:22 AM Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote:
>>
>> The same construction can be used no matter what the underlying assets
>> are. They can be cryptocurrencies, fiat currencies, shares of stock or
>> other divisible assets.
>>
>> If you want to use this method for a swap you can send a "payment" from
>> one of your accounts to another.
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 8:27 AM Nathan Aw <nathan.mk.aw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Second try. Thank you.
>>
>> I am a blockchain engineer based out of Singapore working at a leading
>> bank in ASEAN.
>>
>> I am looking to leverage the Hashed-Timelock Agreements (HTLAs) paradigm
>> for establishing atomicity between different DLT networks for asset swaps
>> to achieve cross border payments with partial to full decentralization in
>> mind.
>>
>> With the goal in mind, I like to understand technically how can this
>> paradigm be applied to achieve payment vs payment (pvp) with semi-trusted
>> nodes such as clearinghouses, banks and individual players? Applying the
>> same concept of a crypto swap between ETH and BTC, the same can be applied
>> between SGD and HKD?
>>
>> Also, I hope to understand the models around how liquidity can be
>> maintained between these nodes?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Nathan Aw
>> https://sg.linkedin.com/in/awnathan
>>
>> https://erc725alliance.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 12:39 AM Nathan Aw <nathan.mk.aw@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am a blockchain engineer based out of Singapore working at a leading
>> bank in ASEAN.
>>
>> I am looking to leverage the Hashed-Timelock Agreements (HTLAs) paradigm
>> for establishing atomicity between different DLT networks for asset swaps
>> to achieve cross border payments with partial to full decentralization in
>> mind.
>>
>> With the goal in mind, I like to understand technically how can this
>> paradigm be applied to achieve payment vs payment (pvp) with semi-trusted
>> nodes such as clearinghouses, banks and individual players? Applying the
>> same concept of a crypto swap between ETH and BTC, the same can be applied
>> between SGD and HKD?
>>
>> Also, I hope to understand the models around how liquidity can be
>> maintained between these nodes?
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Nathan Aw
>> https://sg.linkedin.com/in/awnathan
>> https://erc725alliance.org/
>>
>>
Received on Saturday, 10 November 2018 15:35:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:14:13 UTC