Jump to content
Scout

RIPPLE Ripple’s CTO clarifies that Interledger Protocol [ILP] is not connected to the RippleNet yet

Recommended Posts

Ouch, what's the hold up? Looks like Xrapid use is not really ready yet... Maybe the date on the article is suppose to read 2016 not 2019. If there is any fact to this article that pushes real XRP use in Banks back to at least 2020. I was hoping 2019 was the year for ILP support. This will be the tipping point for mass adoption & real volume. Pretty sure this will push XRP to number 1. The King Koopa of Crypto, the Big Daddy of Block chain.... You get the picture:)

https://ambcrypto.com/ripples-cto-clarifies-that-interledger-protocol-ilp-is-not-connected-to-the-ripplenet-yet/

Edited by Scout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a shame, I was under the impression that XRP and the ILP were there ready and waiting to be used and adopted. I must admit that this news has deflated my hopes and now it looks like we are a lot further away than we really thought and usage is not happening anytime soon. having said that, it now explains to me why all the good news doesn't affect the price, XRP is not being used.

Looks like I will have to work for at least another year before retiring as an xrp millionaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, XRP is not being used.

MercuryFX may have saved 13k$ in 1 transaction, but what I am seeing is that TPS is still between 4 to 8 on xrp charts.

They want to upgrade the maximum to 10k TPS, but what is the point when we can merely get past 15 TPS on some beautiful days.

As soon as the TPS will start increasing on a daily basis I will be sure XRP is being used, AT LAST.

Then I will worry about whether or not it impacts the price.

Edited by JannaOneTrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, cryptosladds said:

Its a shame, I was under the impression that XRP and the ILP were there ready and waiting to be used and adopted.

Although ILP was invented by Ripple, and typically the solutions and applications that use it have also included XRP, they are completely separate networks and technology.  XRP has been around since 2012.  ILP was invented in October of 2015

Sources: https://interledger.org/

https://www.xrp.co/xrp-ledger/

Another good post to reference that explains what Interledger is compared to Bitcoin's lightning network is here: https://forum.interledger.org/t/whats-the-difference-between-interledger-and-lightning/133/2

Quote

we are a lot further away than we really thought and usage is not happening anytime soon

Usage of what?  XRP and Ripple's xRapid are good to go. 

Quote

XRP is not being used.

XRP is being used by many individuals and businesses, including Ripple's xRapid.  Can you elaborate on why are you making this statement? 

Oh... and welcome to the forum! :D

Edited by Hodor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JannaOneTrick said:

Exactly, XRP is not being used.

MercuryFX may have saved 13k$ in 1 transaction, but what I am seeing is that TPS is still between 4 to 8 on xrp charts. 

If I'm not mistaken, you make the first statement, and then immediately refute yourself in the second one, correct? 

I'm not sure I understand why you're focused on XRP Charts TPS.  That number is a reflection of current network load.  Are you attempting to draw conclusions about business use of xRapid from network load? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hodor said:

Another good post to reference that explains what Interledger is compared to Bitcoin's lightning network is here: https://forum.interledger.org/t/whats-the-difference-between-interledger-and-lightning/133/2

fn awesome read

the crux being LN a single asset non-versatility vs ILP multi asset versatility

 

rocket scientist … looking for a rocket scientist

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BobWay said:

One of the reason I wanted to make an account here was to comment on this particular thread. So apologies for resurrecting something slight older.

Without contradicting David or Evan, I'd like to add a bit of context here.

The Ripple product xCurrent does use "The Interledger Protocol" (ILP) version 1.0 in atomic mode. I can say this authoritatively because I was the original architect of RippleConnect (renamed xCurrent) and also part of the Ripple research team during the creation of ILP. One of my key contributions to the protocol was "atomic mode". This is absolutely the right technology for multi-party payments among banks. This includes same currency and cross currency inter-bank transactions. ILP 1.0 atomic mode was specifically designed to "synchronize" multi-party accounting transactions. That is the concept you see referenced here by the Bank of England in their survey

This call for interest explains the concept well.

There are some awesome related threads on this site as well. Here and here. I apologize if I missed others.

Synchronized (atomic) payments among banks is one of the key technologies in Ripple's arsenal. It is hard to overestimate how important it is.

----

On interledger.org what Evan was referencing as "the open interledger" is implemented using ILP version 4 (penny switching). You might ask what happened to ILP v2 and ILP v3. I often ask myself that as well. ;-)  It turns out that those were rather short term interim proposals between ILP v1 and ILP v4. Even more confusing is that there were two different view points on ILP v4 as well. I called them "grown up payments" vs "penny switching". ILP v4 PS is a really mind blowing way to think about reducing payment risk by via "packet switching" analogies with the internet. (I'm happy to go into all the details and differences elsewhere if people are interested.) ILP v4 penny switching serves as the underlying technology for ILP "streaming payments". This is one of the key concepts that is so exciting about Coil!

The important thing to understand is that ILP v4 is NOT a semantic versioning of an incrementally improving ILP v1 (xCurrent) product. The two were designed for different use cases and different user bases. ILP v4 is a second high speed clearing layer (analogous to lightning) that is built to complement the ILP v1 settlement layer (analogous to bitcoin).

----

The two "protocols" are designed to complement each other, however, at the moment the two "networks" don't overlap. This shouldn't cause concern if you understand what the short and long term goals are. Banks are focusing on bank to bank atomic (instantly settled) payments. Individuals are focused on high speed p2p clearing with (currently) ad hoc settlement. If you think of the individuals participants as accounting networks, then they create two (currently) disconnected graphs. This is fine while "the open interledger" is gaining its peer-to-peer feet. But it should be expected that those parties will replace their current ad hoc settlement relationships with standard ILP v1 interbank payments once those API's become available at the consumer level.

The way I understand the current jargon is:

RippleNet: is a bank focused network build using Ripple's xCurrent, xRapid & xVia products. These products are base on ILP V1 atomic mode but are currently being referred to as RippleNet rather than as "The interledger".

The Open Interledger: is a group of individuals building a network using recent interledger.org public standards. These are based on ILP V4 clearing protocols.

The term "THE interledger" creates a hugely unfortunate and unbelievably confusing naming clash. I hope I've done a little to clarify it.

Please come back from time to time. I really enjoy learning about this stuff. It’s like reading a primary source in history before it made history. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz said:

Please come back from time to time. I really enjoy learning about this stuff. It’s like reading a primary source in history before it made history. 

Thanks! I'll try to hang around and add to the conversation when I can.

What I'm really trying to get a handle on is how the community at large perceives XRP and Ripple the company. I know from first hand experience that the perception is usually different from the reality. I noticed this with every Ripple community during my time (consumers, traders, bankers and payments folks). I've just been off the forums so long that I've lost touch with you fine folks and your views.

There is really a lot of discussion going on here on XRPChat. I can't possibly read it all. So if you think I can add clarity to any given discussion, please call my attention to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BobWay said:

Thanks! I'll try to hang around and add to the conversation when I can.

What I'm really trying to get a handle on is how the community at large perceives XRP and Ripple the company. I know from first hand experience that the perception is usually different from the reality. I noticed this with every Ripple community during my time (consumers, traders, bankers and payments folks). I've just been off the forums so long that I've lost touch with you fine folks and your views.

There is really a lot of discussion going on here on XRPChat. I can't possibly read it all. So if you think I can add clarity to any given discussion, please call my attention to it.

I think my big question is how difficult it is to replecate what Ripple is trying to achieve with XRP and xRapid. I mean, I have a pretty good understanding of what the road map is, and how it is going to be achieved, but I don’t understand if other companies are sourcing coders that are capable of building out a network with a digital asset like Ripple is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Raz said:

I think my big question is how difficult it is to replecate what Ripple is trying to achieve with XRP and xRapid. I mean, I have a pretty good understanding of what the road map is, and how it is going to be achieved, but I don’t understand if other companies are sourcing coders that are capable of building out a network with a digital asset like Ripple is.

I think that it is deceptively hard to replicate. It seems like it should be technically easy (and it is), but the hard parts are compliance and liquidity based. That is where Ripple has be working the hardest.

it's also short sighted to think of XRP as being synonymous with xRapid and not the other products. While it may seem so at the moment, it should be clear from the RippleNet diagrams that they all fit together into a comprehensive system where each component builds on the others.

It turns out that international payments through crypto draw nicely on paper, but there are a lot of moving parts.

  1. Alice generally has to send money from her account through the local currency system to a compliant exchange bank account.
  2. The exchange has to detect the local bank transfer and then credit that money to someone on the exchange.
  3. The local currency has to be traded at the current rate for crypt
  4. The crypto need to be sent via blockchain to the remote exchange
  5. The crypto needs to be credited to someone on the exchange.
  6. The crypto needs to be traded at the current rate for the remote currency.
  7. The remote currency needs to be moved off the exchange and credited to someone at that exchange's bank
  8. The money needs to be send from the account at the exchanges bank to Bob's account through the local system.

Then of course you find out that Bob closed his account last week. So the whole process needs to suffer a lossy reversal process. But all of that is really easy conceptually...

Later you realize that sending money to a local exchange and trading it for crypto yourself is normally a series of two-party transaction. (otherwise known as "just doing business"). Exchange are setup and compliant for these types of transactions. But sending payments generally require three (or multiple) party transaction. This turns "just doing business" into "money transmission" which is highly over regulated in every country and state. Aaarrrggg!

Edited by BobWay
pressed return too soon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...