Re: [Blockchain-interop] Scope of Work

[Thomas Hardjono <[e-mail]>]

Hi Aetienne,

>> Regarding the scope: I was wondering whether we 
>> should also include other interoperability issues apart 
>> from asset transfers, such as referencing data 
>> between blockchains (or from a blockchain to a legacy system)?

Yes, for sure -- the model describes in the architecture draft calls these references and data (on-chain and off-chain) generically as "blockchain resources".

For example, if a third party entity is used to "price"  a virtual asset (e.g. economic pricing or estimate done by a bank or FI) prior to the asset transfer, then the transfer-payload between G1 and G2 could (must) include a link (e.g. URL or hash) to the claim signed by the  third party.

This means that G1 must sign the payload using its entity public key pair (not the transaction public key pair).  Here G1 (i.e. the VASP owner of G1) is essentially asserting the truthfulness of the link to the resource.

Best


-- thomas --



________________________________________
From: Blockchain-interop [[e-mail]] on behalf of [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 2:45 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [Blockchain-interop] Scope of Work

Hi all, great meeting you all in today's kickoff call!

Regarding the scope: I was wondering whether we should also include other interoperability issues apart from asset transfers, such as referencing data between blockchains (or from a blockchain to a legacy system)?

The reason why I'm asking is because a new DLT law is expected to enter into force in Switzerland next year, which will require that for all DLT-based financial instruments corresponding investor documentation (e.g. prospectus) shall be made available either directly on the given ledger or by referring to an outside data storage (which could be a legacy system as mentioned on slide 10 point 2). The latter case obviously creates an interoperability problem. So far the legislator has only outlined that there needs to be a unique pointer/identifier (e.g. a hash of the document), to ensure integrity of the accompanying external documentation. But apart from that there are currently no specific technical guidelines on how an interoperable on-/off-ledger pointer mechanism shall work. IMO our IETF working group could be a great platform to discuss and provide some guidance. What do you think?

Best regards
Aetienne