[Din] Governance principles and models (Was: Updated charter proposal)
Frode Kileng <frodek@tele.no> Mon, 09 July 2018 07:59 UTC
Return-Path: <frodek@tele.no>
X-Original-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F7B130DDA for <din@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 00:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-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 NFrFcTS5FqI9 for <din@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 00:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gorgon.tele.no (gorgon.tele.no [IPv6:2001:700:800::70]) (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 5F6D51277CC for <din@irtf.org>; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 00:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1]) by gorgon.tele.no with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <frodek@tele.no>) id 1fcR4d-0001OW-Fg for din@irtf.org; Mon, 09 Jul 2018 09:59:07 +0200
From: Frode Kileng <frodek@tele.no>
To: din@irtf.org
Message-ID: <27902c54-8b50-34bc-65a7-2316a85a10a7@tele.no>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 09:59:07 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/din/gqfWsmlIjLWe06mnRPnifZWr4zM>
Subject: [Din] Governance principles and models (Was: Updated charter proposal)
X-BeenThere: din@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of distributed Internet Infrastructure approaches, aspects such as Service Federation, and underlying technologies" <din.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/din>, <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/din/>
List-Post: <mailto:din@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/din>, <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 07:59:17 -0000
Hi. I think an important lesson from the main public blockchains in operations today is that they are definitively not autonomous and mechanisms are needed to handle the future evolution and problems caused by bugs, human errors, attacks. And that unclear rules and faulty mechanisms undermines the trust and the success of the chains. Se for example the "constitutional mess" of the ($4bn) EOS blockchain is just the latest example (*) or the Ethereum chain split (**). Or how an ad-hoc community effort was needed to save bitcoin when an integer overflow bug "created ~92bn more bitcoins than can exists" (***) and when node sw upgrade that caused a bitcoin chain split lasting for 24 blocks / 6 hours (****). Although you could argue that such mechanisms and rules are covered by the charter text "Trust management and delegation in decentralized communication settings", I do recommend to state it more explicitly as both a research challenge and in the list of objectives, i.e. defining the blockchain governance principles and governance model(s) to enforce them. Best regards Frode Kileng (*) https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2018/06/19/eos-cryptocurrency-constitution/, https://www.techinasia.com/eos-at-risk, (**) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum#The_DAO_event (***) https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Value_overflow_incident (****) https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0050.mediawiki
- [Din] Governance principles and models (Was: Upda… Frode Kileng