Re: [Blockchain-interop] Use Case proposal - Rafael Belchior

Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu> Fri, 13 November 2020 14:11 UTC

Return-Path: <hardjono@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: blockchain-interop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: blockchain-interop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 837273A0B9C; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:11:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UwHGbz2VdOUb; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:11:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outgoing-exchange-5.mit.edu (outgoing-exchange-5.mit.edu [18.9.28.59]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 553093A0962; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 06:11:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from w92exedge3.exchange.mit.edu (W92EXEDGE3.EXCHANGE.MIT.EDU [18.7.73.15]) by outgoing-exchange-5.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 0ADEBRGj007644; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:11:28 -0500
Received: from oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.4.88) by w92exedge3.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.73.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1293.2; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:11:05 -0500
Received: from oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.4.88) by oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.4.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:11:08 -0500
Received: from oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu ([18.9.4.88]) by oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu ([18.9.4.88]) with mapi id 15.00.1365.000; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:11:08 -0500
From: Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu>
To: Rafael Belchior <rafael.belchior=40tecnico.ulisboa.pt@dmarc.ietf.org>, "blockchain-interop@ietf.org" <blockchain-interop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Blockchain-interop] Use Case proposal - Rafael Belchior
Thread-Index: AQHWuPymBTT81SoJP0mmE4vA9MnraqnGGOmU
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:11:08 +0000
Message-ID: <3293380050fe432c980cbd520e722b07@oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu>
References: <92fdf470c426405e65e0886f9f7c2ca2@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
In-Reply-To: <92fdf470c426405e65e0886f9f7c2ca2@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [73.167.220.69]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/blockchain-interop/E9nrKvTBx3TnP6siUiRoib741JM>
Subject: Re: [Blockchain-interop] Use Case proposal - Rafael Belchior
X-BeenThere: blockchain-interop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Blockchain Gateway Interoperability Protocol <blockchain-interop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/blockchain-interop>, <mailto:blockchain-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/blockchain-interop/>
List-Post: <mailto:blockchain-interop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:blockchain-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/blockchain-interop>, <mailto:blockchain-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:11:36 -0000

Thanks Rafael,


>> Use-Case: Blockchain Migration

Migrating entire blockchains/DLTs may be very relevant for private DLTs.  So having a gateway to perform the migration would be very useful.


>>> Use Case: Escrowed Sale of On-Chain Data for Fiat
>>> I can elaborate on this if the idea makes sense: gateways can enable
>>> on-chain data selling for fiat. A source gateway locks an asset
>>> (representing data), in exchange for fiat. The recipient gateway makes a
>>> payment to a payment network (e.g., Interledger, Visa) with
>>> cryptocurrencies or other accepted tokens. Upon transaction validation,
>>> the source gateway transfers the asset to the recipient gateway.

This is interesting in that the data (data-files) may be large, and could be placed off-chain. In this case the DLT (in the blocks of the ledger) will only be keeping a hash of the data-file.

This is very similar to digitized certificates of real-world assets (e.g. land-ownership deeds; warehouse receipts; etc).  The  digitized-certificates are placed off-chain in some kind of asset depository/repository (e.g. like the DTCC), but the ownerships (i.e. current ownership) is represented on a DLT.

The challenge is that the ownership-representation (entry in DLT) must be movable to a different DLT.  If say Alice us using DLT L1 sells the ownership to Bob on DLT L2, then Bob may insists that the new "home" of the ownership-representation is L2.  This is the role of the gateway-to-gateway protocol. (nb.  Moving the ownership-representation does not change the location of digitized-certificates at the asset depository).


best


-- thomas --




________________________________________
From: Blockchain-interop [blockchain-interop-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Rafael Belchior [rafael.belchior=40tecnico.ulisboa.pt@dmarc.ietf.org]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 9:03 AM
To: blockchain-interop@ietf.org
Subject: [Blockchain-interop] Use Case proposal - Rafael Belchior

Dear All,
Regarding
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-sardon-blockchain-gateways-usecases-00.txt,
I have a use case related to the application and data portability use
case category.

Use-Case: Blockchain Migration

The suitability of an application running on a blockchain platform
depends on the underlying blockchain properties. As blockchain
technologies are maturing at a fast pace, its characteristics such as
performance, transaction fees, security, and privacy models change. The
fast-moving regulatory environment also contributes to the gap
product/market fit of a blockchain solution.

It is, therefore, desirable for an organization/consortium to be able to
replace the blockchain infrastructure supporting a particular service.
Dozens of migrations on public blockchains have been done, paving the
way for public-private blockchain migrations.

Currently, when a consortium wants to migrate the entire blockchain the
solution is to re-implement business logic using a different blockchain
platform, and arbitrary recreate the assets and data on the target
blockchain, yielding great effort and time, as well as losing blockchain
properties such as immutability, consistency, and transparency.

Gateway transfers can be leveraged to directly migrate assets from a
source to a target DLT, rendering user management flexibility,
transparency, and auditability to migrate blockchain-based solutions,
avoiding the aforementioned pitfalls.



Use Case: Escrowed Sale of On-Chain Data for Fiat
I can elaborate on this if the idea makes sense: gateways can enable
on-chain data selling for fiat. A source gateway locks an asset
(representing data), in exchange for fiat. The recipient gateway makes a
payment to a payment network (e.g., Interledger, Visa) with
cryptocurrencies or other accepted tokens. Upon transaction validation,
the source gateway transfers the asset to the recipient gateway.


Any thoughts?

Cheers,
--
Rafael Belchior
Ph.D. student in Computer Science and Engineering, Blockchain - Técnico
Lisboa
https://rafaelapb.github.io/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/rafaelpbelchior/

--
Blockchain-interop mailing list
Blockchain-interop@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/blockchain-interop