W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-ig@w3.org > August 2016

Re: Blockchains and the Web of Things?

From: Drasko DRASKOVIC <drasko.draskovic@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 10:08:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEk6gTDvTmY1xER6JBtY1vaSpC2c-D4+cLuqQVJdt1DKSz7DKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre - Filament <peter@filament.com>
Cc: "Tibor Z. Pardi" <tibor@zovolt.com>, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>, Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>
Hi Peter,
Thanks a lot for joying the discussion. You are really well positioned
to give us the clarifications on the topic ;).

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Peter Saint-Andre - Filament
<peter@filament.com> wrote:

> There is no native blockchain support in telehash itself. At Filament we use
> telehash for all of our communications (whether over radio or over IP), but
> we don't need blockchain for that. It's true that we've explored using
> blockchain for alternative resolution (basically replacing the 13 root DNS
> servers with a blockchain for resolving certain names), but for small
> networks or private communities you can simply discover your neighbors and
> communicate with them based on hashnames.

I guess you have a predefined list of hashnames. Is it possible to
dynamically add/remove participants? How do you handle discovery?


> The DHT aspects of telehash got removed before v3. Something like that still
> seems useful in certain situations, but it's not a feature that the little
> telehash community has focused on in the last 12+ months.

Would it be fair to conclude that Telehash does *not** use blockchain
and does **not** use any form of DHT?

> In Pennybank, two entities essentially set up a shared escrow and complete
> microtransactions against that using JWT. Thus each transaction doesn't need
> to be cleared against a public or private blockchain, which is more
> efficient and more feasible in some IoT scenarios (e.g., intermittent or
> eventual connectivity). IMHO JWT is a lot more lightweight and portable than
> blockchains for smart contracts and microtransactions.

Agreed for JWT. Very interesting and lightweight approach.

>
> The IoT/blockchain use cases that seem more realistic to me (than messaging,
> smart contracts, and microtransactions) are focused on placing authenticated
> information in shared ledgers for things like regulatory compliance and
> supply chain management. That uses the ledger for what it's good at but
> doesn't place a large burden on constrained devices at the edge.

Agreed on this also. Blockchain seems to heavy for IoT in the LPWAN context.

BR,
Drasko
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2016 08:08:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:27:06 UTC