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.

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