Jump to content

What would happen if Ripple turned off their validators for a week

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, xerxesramesepolybius said:

Gee thanks.

Where is the best place to see the up-to-date UNL?

One of the things I recall Tiff complaining about was that there are validators and validators and the ones not on the UNL don't really matter.

If anything, without a UNL, there would be more diversity of validation (as far as my understanding goes). A "bad actor" would need to convince at least 80% of validators to create a ledger with bogus data (again, as far as my understanding goes). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, nikb said:

You’re welcome. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the topic.

Thanks for participating here Nik, it’s great to see input from experts.

Can I ask regarding the UNL...  given that Ripple serve a UNL and most validators would leave that as their default trusted list, what is the point of non UNL validators?

Obviously one point is that over time their behaviours and uptime might inform future versions of the UNL...  by participating they are creating a record that they can stand on to be counted in a future UNL.

But apart from that,  do the other validators add to robustness?  (I don’t see how,  if the majority are following the UNL.)


Also, should we be hoping for growth over time in the size of the UNL?  The larger the pool and the more diverse in nature, location and jurisdiction,  the less vulnerable the ledger?


Thanks for an thoughts you have time to share on this.

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...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.