[Sat] Views

ladler2@bellatlantic.net Thu, 12 January 2023 19:24 UTC

From: ladler2@bellatlantic.net
To: sat@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 14:24:03 -0500
Message-ID: <000001d926bb$6e9a3500$4bce9f00$@bellatlantic.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01D92691.85C4A230"
Thread-Index: Adkmu23iSJrfYyPvSw6nND+b50Qxsg==
Content-Language: en-us
References: <000001d926bb$6e9a3500$4bce9f00$.ref@bellatlantic.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sat/e6mWPHAiJt0UdFM1Sv2Xoc0ZjlM>
Subject: [Sat] Views
Precedence: list

Hi Rama:

  I am referring to your two documents linked in your Oct. 17, 2022 email.

In the SATP process the only use I can see for a View is to examine the
Digital Asset

before it is actually transferred.  However, it has been stated in the WG
meetings that

the details of the Digital Asset and the transfer must be specified in an
agreement that

precedes the transfer.  So supporting Views is an additional function for
the gateways.

 

Adding  the processing of Views to the gateways may be useful to support
application

communications between Blockchain networks.  But the additional security
problems View

processing entails is not justified unless View processing is required for
SATP.

We also have a great of work to make SATP a useful protocol in the real
world.

 

David Millman

[Sat] Views ladler2
Re: [Sat] Views Venkatraman Ramakrishna
Re: [Sat] Views Tecnico Lisboa
Re: [Sat] Views Venkatraman Ramakrishna
Re: [Sat] Views Rafael Belchior
Re: [Sat] Views Venkatraman Ramakrishna
Re: [Sat] Views Venkatraman Ramakrishna