Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Review/align with Agoric's VatTP and CapTP #50

Closed
ebuchman opened this issue Mar 19, 2019 · 8 comments
Closed

Review/align with Agoric's VatTP and CapTP #50

ebuchman opened this issue Mar 19, 2019 · 8 comments
Assignees
@cwgoes
Labels
app Application layer. brainstorming Open-ended brainstorming. tao Transport, authentication, & ordering layer.
Milestone
IBC 1.0.0-rc3

Comments

@ebuchman
Copy link
Member

The Agoric team has had a rough analog of IBC for decades. In my understanding, it is split between two layers as follows:

  • VatTP - roughly the Tendermint side of IBC (light client authentication)
  • CapTP - roughly the Application side of IBC (channels and packets)

We should review these and work towards alignment between them and IBC.
@ebuchman ebuchman added tao Transport, authentication, & ordering layer. app Application layer. brainstorming Open-ended brainstorming. labels Mar 19, 2019
@mossid
Copy link

mossid commented Apr 4, 2019

Erights full paper: http://www.erights.org/talks/thesis/markm-thesis.pdf

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Apr 11, 2019

To-do:

  • Define desired Byzantine-fault tolerance (of blockchains) model
  • Figure out precise conceptual mapping between IBC <=> CapTP
  • See if capabilities could be passed over IBC as an application-layer format

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Jun 16, 2019

After meeting in Berlin we have concluded to merge VatTP & IBC.

Next step: follow-up changes (#126) and re-convene to review.

@cwgoes cwgoes mentioned this issue Jun 25, 2019
Closed
10 tasks
@cwgoes cwgoes added this to the Specification Clarification milestone Jun 25, 2019
@cwgoes cwgoes self-assigned this Jun 25, 2019
@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Jul 15, 2019

To be further discussed in "IBC 1.0-rc0 Spec Review Week" at the end of July.

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Jul 30, 2019

To be resolved: which of solo-solo, solo-chain, chain-chain are covered by IBC?

@mossid
Copy link

mossid commented Jul 30, 2019

I'm not sure about solo-solo, but solo-chain and chain-chain should be covered

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Aug 4, 2019

I believe further points here have been covered in the various issued marked "from-review".

@cwgoes
Copy link
Contributor

cwgoes commented Aug 24, 2019

I think necessary points here have been sufficiently covered elsewhere.

Feel free to reopen if further revisions are necessary to support CapTP-on-IBC.

@cwgoes cwgoes closed this as completed Aug 24, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@cwgoes cwgoes

Labels
app Application layer. brainstorming Open-ended brainstorming. tao Transport, authentication, & ordering layer.
Projects
IBC-GO Eureka
Status: Backlog
Milestone
IBC 1.0.0-rc3
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@ebuchman @mossid @cwgoes