RippleNet and it's parts

[Graine]

1 hour ago, Lumpy said:

Having two accounts and trading XRP on both platforms does not mean to have a XRP wallet address on the XRP Ledger. The XRP Ledger won't be used at any moment in the process.  

What? xRapid as currently explained implies transfer from exchangeA to exchangeB of XRP through RCL. You may not have a separate wallet for your stash of xrp, but your xrp are already present in aggregated wallets of xRapid-enabled exchanges. 

You could potentially prefund xrp at both exchanges and provide your xrp instantly to xRapid transactions. 

[Lumpy]

1 hour ago, Graine said:

What? xRapid as currently explained implies transfer from exchangeA to exchangeB of XRP through RCL.

Nop. Definitely not true. It's exactly what I am trying to explain here to @KarmaCoverage.

xRapid does not necessarily rely on the XRP Ledger (RCL) to provide liquidity. Transfer of XRP from one exchange to another does not mean payment as defined by the Ripple protocol (https://ripple.com/build/rippleapi/#payment). 

The transfer of property is made but not recorded on the XRP Ledger.

As explained, XRP exchanges can take place off-blockchain. Imagine I bought 10 XRP through the XRP Ledger. Then I write a paper/ contract that says the 10 XRP now belongs to you. The change of property is made and there is no evidence of that in the XRP Ledger. 

Today, xRapid relies on private exchanges (vs. public gateways) because it's where there is the best liquidity. Below an explanation why private exchange model is the preferred one.

XRP being used as a bridge asset to provide liquidity does not mean going through the payment path finding feature of the XRP Ledger.

If you simply exchange USD for XRP then XRP for Mexican pesos then you use XRP as a bridge currency. 

It would be great here to have the confirmation (or not) of what I said in this post and previously by a Ripple employee @mDuo13 please?

it's well explained here btw.

 

Another evidence of what I am saying is the number of payments and exchanges recorded since 2015 on the Ledger. It's barely the same except during speculative periods. If xRapid were using the XRP Ledger to provide liquidity we will see a huge difference in these metrics.

https://xrpcharts.ripple.com/#/metrics

 

Edited February 16, 2018 by Lumpy

[Graine]

3 minutes ago, Lumpy said:

xRapid does not necessarily rely on the XRP Ledger (RCL) to provide liquidity.

How did we jumped from whether XRP-XRP transfer reflect on RCL when using xRapid to using RCL to source liquidity?

3 minutes ago, Lumpy said:

Then I write a paper/ contract that says the 10 XRP now belongs to you. The change of property is made and there is no evidence of that in the XRP Ledger. 

Yah, it's possible. But I'd have to trust that you won't use a private key to transfer those xrp back. While this kind of trade happen a lot OTC, this is beside the scope of how xRapid operates. 

4 minutes ago, Lumpy said:

XRP being used as a bridge asset to provide liquidity does not mean going through the payment path finding feature of the XRP Ledger.

No one said it uses RCL's pathfinding. 

In order to get 'instant settlement' in xRapid, you have to move XRP from ExchangeA to ExchangeB. XRP lives on RCL. See Miguel's talk where he announced Cuallix's trials. 

[Lumpy]

1 hour ago, Graine said:

XRP lives on RCL.

XRP does not live on the XRP Ledger. XRP exchanges on the XRP Ledger represent 0.9% of the total XRP exchanges.

The XRP Ledger is mainly used today as the ultimate store of XRP rather than as a decentralized exchange (as wrote by JoelKatz).

I know it is counter-intuitive, but xRapid does absolutely not rely on the XRP Ledger to perform its purpose: sourcing liquidity.

Private exchanges (and not issuing gateways such as Bitstamp or Gatehub) provide the best market places to exchange XRP against fiat currencies because it's where you have significant volume of trading.

Then xRapid uses private exchanges that trade XRP to source liquidity from speculators and other members of the public who're trading cryptocurrencies for fiat and vice-versa. It pairs trades at different exchanges in real time and transfers the XRP between exchanges. It is, in a sense, a really polished standard interface to the exchanges' own APIs. (as wrote by mDuo13)

Here transfers does not necessary mean instant payment of XRP. It's a transfer of property between the two exchanges. 

Maybe the real payment of XRP is settled at the end of the day between the wallet from exchange A and the wallet of exchange B. Instant messaging/ synchronization between the two private ledgers does not mean instant payments of XRP. 

The end-to-end payment is instant but not necessarily the XRP payment.

Edited February 16, 2018 by Lumpy

[Lumpy]

@mDuo13 could you please confirm (the validity of our conversation)?  or the Creator @JoelKatz ?

Edited February 16, 2018 by Lumpy

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Lumpy said:

XRP does not live on the XRP Ledger. XRP exchanges on the XRP Ledger represent 0.9% of the total XRP exchanges.

well, they exchange "derivatives" of xrp, e.g. when you trade xrp/eur on bitstamp this isn't real xrp (or euro) yet, it's an IOU/issuance... until it settles later

without the xrp ledger, there'd be no xrp -- but with the escrow and ILP, a lot of cool "tricks" can be done through exchanges, autobridging/orderbooks, etc

[mDuo13]

Sorry, @Lumpy, you've done a lot of research but it seems you've misunderstood xRapid.

The transfer from one exchange to another happens on the XRP Ledger. As you noted, it wouldn't have to do so. But for ownership of XRP to change without a transaction in the XRP Ledger, the two entities doing business would have to have a relationship with one another where they tracked who owns what. (In other words, at least one would need to have an account with the other.) That's basically how correspondent banking works today and it's why we have all these "float" relationships tying up trillions of dollars' worth of value worldwide.

The beauty of xRapid is that the exchanges don't have to do that. XRP doesn't know national boundaries and it's so cheap and fast to transfer that the exchanges in question don't have to know each other; you can just send XRP from one to the other. The xRapid customer just needs to open accounts at both exchanges (and the balance sitting around on the receiving end can be minimal or zero).

10 hours ago, KarmaCoverage said:

...so "no more GBP on ledger"? This sort of sucks, IOUs and all the things that RCL can do is what attracted me to Ripple in the first place. To see much of that abstracted away, and off ledger (like the polo example) is somewhat sad.

I agree. The nice thing is, the functionality in the XRP Ledger isn't going away, there are still advantages to it, and I think we may eventually reach a point where people use it more. But for now, trading in off-ledger exchanges or connecting payments of different assets via ILP Connectors is the way to go.

Sadly, one of the major reasons that Ripple isn't pushing for companies to issue non-XRP currencies on the XRP Ledger right now is a regulatory one. My understanding is—and mind you, I am decidedly not a lawyer, so this is likely to be a poor representation of the proper rules—that there's a key difference between businesses that enable "two party" transactions and "three party" transactions. Issuing gateways end up looking a lot like they're enabling three-party transactions (person sends money to gateway, gateway sends money to third party) which in the USA means you need money transmitter licenses, which are different per state. Meanwhile, exchanges only facilitate two-party transactions (person gives asset to exchange, same person comes back with different asset from same exchange), which means they don't need the same type of license and they don't need 50+ different ones just to operate in the US. So in other words, it's kind of a quirk of the USA's regulatory environment that gateways need to spend way more time and money getting proper licenses than exchanges do, even though theoretically what gateways are doing is simpler.

[KarmaCoverage]

3 hours ago, mDuo13 said:

Sadly, one of the major reasons that Ripple isn't pushing for companies to issue non-XRP currencies on the XRP Ledger right now is a regulatory one.

This makes sense, for now, and these headwinds will shift to tailwinds in time, I hope, or sidechain RCLs.

There is also the increased ledger close speed (TPS), because no/low pathfinding process to preform?

3 hours ago, mDuo13 said:

there's a key difference between businesses that enable "two party" transactions and "three party" transactions

Interesting

Edited February 17, 2018 by KarmaCoverage

[KarmaCoverage]

3 hours ago, mDuo13 said:

(and the balance sitting around on the receiving end can be minimal or zero).

This seems to speak to ILPv4's forward routing, without pre escrow?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, mDuo13 said:

The beauty of xRapid

Yes it is a thing of beauty isn't it...      So cool and awesome to use.

Thank you MDuo for being so helpful here...  it's really interesting to see the reason for the Gateway pivot to Exchanges.

Can I ask please about corporate strategic statistics being available to competitors?  Is that an issue you must deal with?  I know that the institution can aggregate, and also can transact off XRPLedger for some portions of its commerce.  But ultimately the total volume of its settled funds will be available to others to examine.  Is that something that you need to mitigate or is it not an issue?

Thanks for any insight you can offer and if this is a too-close-to-the-bone question then please just ignore me....  (My wife can show you how  )

[Lumpy]

Thanks @mDuo13 

Thanks @Graine

Thanks @KarmaCoverage

Now I think I can explain xRapid to a child of 6 yo

I own a business that develops soft solutions running on the XRP Ledger. That's the reason why I need to understand and challenge the ecosystem where I am evolving!

Cheers

[Graine]

15 hours ago, mDuo13 said:

The xRapid customer just needs to open accounts at both exchanges

Does this mean that each customer gets the unique destination tag regardless of direction of exchange? Does the exchange.A appends unique destination tag as per regular users? Can we have a txid of one such transaction? Pretty please? 

[KarmaCoverage]

5 minutes ago, Graine said:

Does this mean that each customer gets the unique destination tag regardless of direction of exchange? Does the exchange.A appends unique destination tag as per regular users? Can we have a txid of one such transaction? Pretty please? 

I think you would want to be looking for PayChan TXs. That is what ILPv4 seems to be using.

I watched that video with Miguel last night, and he spoke of lending XRP, and making a spread on value flows.

There was a thread where I posted about how Ripple could lend XRP, and since we don't know the deal terms Ripple has made with Exchanges, I'm thinking I should go back and look that up because...

With xRapid maybe Ripple is lending the Exchanges their inventory of XRP, and maybe Ripple and the Exchange get a slice of the spread on flows routed through xRapid, the Exchange certainly should just for operating the Exchange, but if the Exchande didn't want to, (or couldn't afford to) own enough XRP in inventory to satisfy their user's trading needs then Ripple could easily lend some XRP to meet the market demand.

[Graine]

16 minutes ago, KarmaCoverage said:

I think you would want to be looking for PayChan TXs. That is what ILPv4 seems to be using.

v4 is general public only, so far. Hence, it is irrelevant. I have several candidates for Cuallix, but I want official statement

I don't think Ripple has overcome the regulatory hurdles, associated with lending xrp as a company.