Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A  (Read 951 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline indolering

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
[Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« on: January 18, 2015, 05:53:07 PM »

This is a discussion thread for Indolering's proposal for .p2p: The Road to Universal .p2p Resolution. I'll try to be online all day (January 18) both here and on the IRC chat room.

Feel free to ask me anything!

Update: What is .p2p?

.p2p is a new top level domain, akin to .com or .net.  However, instead of being controlled by a central authority, domain name purchases and ownership is controlled via the blockchain.  This is exciting for two reasons:
  • It is very difficult to censor the domains or control their ownership.
  • We can include encryption information in the blockchain, removing a key vector for MITM attacks.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2015, 07:40:14 PM by indolering »

sumantso

  • Guest
Re: .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2015, 06:29:20 PM »
I lack any expertise to understand what was said, but if BM, Toast and co feel its good then I am all for it (it does sound good to me). Waiting to hear a line or two from them.

Regarding a different DAC, I remember BM saying during the merger that this was necessary to get the network effect, and that at any time it can be branched off and separated.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2015, 06:44:46 PM by sumantso »

Offline matt608

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 878
    • View Profile
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2015, 07:10:26 PM »
Hi Indolering,

In your proposal you said "As long as BTS holders benefit from selling the namespace in what eventually becomes a secure decentralized DNS solution, everyone should be satisfied."

Could you please explain a bit more about the basics of what .p2p is, what does it do, how does it bring income to BTS.  Does it prevent domain name squatting, if so how? (thought I heard that somewhere..)

Thanks

matt608

Offline arhag

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1214
    • View Profile
    • My posts on Steem
  • BTS: arhag
  • GitHub: arhag
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2015, 07:15:46 PM »
This is incredibly exciting and I am happy that you are planning on contributing to the BitShares .p2p effort. And despite the additional complication it adds, I agree that it is critical to design that legacy-compatible system to act as the bridge to allow people to eventually move to the ideal .p2p system.

I look forward to hearing more details about the plan and studying it more carefully later. One thing I have a concern about is the point raised about a new DAC possibly being needed. I hope that is not the case and I don't really see the case for why it would need to be, but if it is necessary then as you mentioned I think the right way to do that would be to sharedrop on BTS. Anyway, those are details for much later.

But for now I will say that I approve of this proposal and will vote for the delegates when they're ready. However, I personally recommend that you also register the third "operation expense" delegate as a 100% delegate for any discretionary spending. You could take all 100% pay for two weeks to repay the registration fee and then after that continue burning the remaining 90% so it acts like a 10% delegate. This provides the flexibility to later raise the effective percentage if necessary (assuming there isn't clear dissent against that action by the community) without having to go through the troublesome process of getting a new delegate registered and voted up to the top 101 ranks.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2015, 07:17:29 PM by arhag »

Offline indolering

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2015, 07:46:54 PM »
I updated the original post to include information about what .p2p is.

The other questions related to creating a new DAC.  Currently, we cannot boot up a new DAC because we need the existing infrastructure (delegates, exchange volume, etc). 

However, it might make sense to create a new DAC that is tailored to this task in the future.  For example, a trusted base doesn't need 10-second transaction times – this bloats the blockchain and increases the network activity required by the client.  Bitcoin's traditional 10 minute block intervals matches the existing DNS system rather well.

Again, however, if a DAC is created there will be a share drop on BTS.

Offline indolering

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2015, 07:52:43 PM »
But for now I will say that I approve of this proposal and will vote for the delegates when they're ready. However, I personally recommend that you also register the third "operation expense" delegate as a 100% delegate for any discretionary spending. You could take all 100% pay for two weeks to repay the registration fee and then after that continue burning the remaining 90% so it acts like a 10% delegate. This provides the flexibility to later raise the effective percentage if necessary (assuming there isn't clear dissent against that action by the community) without having to go through the troublesome process of getting a new delegate registered and voted up to the top 101 ranks.

Yeah, I'm still relatively new to DPoS and BitShares' exact process.  I think you are right, it would make more sense to simply have it run at 100%.  However, I have a feeling that I should wait to burn it until 2016, after the various expenses have been paid for.  Then I'm not constantly lending money through my personal bank account and hoping that the exchange rate doesn't fall off of a cliff.

Offline pc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
    • View Profile
    • Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko?
  • BTS: cyrano
  • Witness: cyrano
  • Payrate: 100%
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2015, 08:51:47 PM »
Great plan, you have my votes!

(Disclaimer: I'm involved with Namecoin in that I maintain its linux packages.)
Please vote for my BitShares witness "cyrano" and for my STEEM witness "cyrano.witness"!
Bitcoin - Perspektive oder Risiko? ISBN 978-3-8442-6568-2 http://bitcoin.quisquis.de

Offline fuzzy

Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2015, 09:04:40 PM »
This is a discussion thread for Indolering's proposal for .p2p: The Road to Universal .p2p Resolution. I'll try to be online all day (January 18) both here and on the IRC chat room.

Feel free to ask me anything!

Update: What is .p2p?

.p2p is a new top level domain, akin to .com or .net.  However, instead of being controlled by a central authority, domain name purchases and ownership is controlled via the blockchain.  This is exciting for two reasons:
  • It is very difficult to censor the domains or control their ownership.
  • We can include encryption information in the blockchain, removing a key vector for MITM attacks.

We could set up a delegate hangout where we could record the community's questions as well...if you are interested.  Just pm me if you are :)
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline Rune

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
    • View Profile
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2015, 09:09:17 PM »
This is great. Probably the best and most comprehensive delegate proposal our community has seen yet.

We should all thank toast for poaching indolering ;)

Offline cass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4329
  • /(┬.┬)\
    • View Profile
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2015, 09:11:17 PM »
Go for it and welcome aboard :)!

 +5%
« Last Edit: January 18, 2015, 09:20:03 PM by cass »
█║▌║║█  - - -  The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear  - - -  █║▌║║█

Offline cass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4329
  • /(┬.┬)\
    • View Profile
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2015, 09:11:43 PM »
We should all thank toast for poaching indolering ;)

indeed
█║▌║║█  - - -  The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear  - - -  █║▌║║█

Offline indolering

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2015, 10:42:58 PM »
We could set up a delegate hangout where we could record the community's questions as well...if you are interested.  Just pm me if you are :)

I don't know the process, I'm just following whatever Toast tells me to do.  But I would be happy to do a delegate hangout!  :)

This is great. Probably the best and most comprehensive delegate proposal our community has seen yet.

We should all thank toast for poaching indolering ;)

You apparently didn't read the proposal very carefully  ;).

Quote
However, I want to be upfront in my continued association with Namecoin.  I am a Namecoin contributor who also wants to become a BitShares contributor, but I am in no way being “poached” by BitShares.  Even if delegate pay could sustain me at a market competitive rate, I honestly wouldn’t be of much use without my continued collaboration with my colleagues in the Namecoin community.

Namecoin developers are all volunteers and we are eager to have others tackle this problem. Posts to our internal board regarding potential collaborations and my trip to BitShares HQ have been met with nothing but positive feedback.  The difference between Namecoin and BitShares is similar to that of Debian and RedHat or Firefox and Chrome.

My goal in collaborating with BitShares is to pool our resources and reduce duplication of effort.  Both projects need to work with the IETF, ICANN, certificate authorities DNS providers, and anonymity networks.  It’s time we start working together to end online censorship and make the internet safe from corrupt governments.

I am, however, incredibly grateful to Toast for believing in me and helping me bring this to your community.  I hope we can do something important.

Offline fuzzy

Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2015, 10:53:43 PM »
We could set up a delegate hangout where we could record the community's questions as well...if you are interested.  Just pm me if you are :)

I don't know the process, I'm just following whatever Toast tells me to do.  But I would be happy to do a delegate hangout!  :)

This is great. Probably the best and most comprehensive delegate proposal our community has seen yet.

We should all thank toast for poaching indolering ;)

You apparently didn't read the proposal very carefully  ;).

Quote
However, I want to be upfront in my continued association with Namecoin.  I am a Namecoin contributor who also wants to become a BitShares contributor, but I am in no way being “poached” by BitShares.  Even if delegate pay could sustain me at a market competitive rate, I honestly wouldn’t be of much use without my continued collaboration with my colleagues in the Namecoin community.

Namecoin developers are all volunteers and we are eager to have others tackle this problem. Posts to our internal board regarding potential collaborations and my trip to BitShares HQ have been met with nothing but positive feedback.  The difference between Namecoin and BitShares is similar to that of Debian and RedHat or Firefox and Chrome.

My goal in collaborating with BitShares is to pool our resources and reduce duplication of effort.  Both projects need to work with the IETF, ICANN, certificate authorities DNS providers, and anonymity networks.  It’s time we start working together to end online censorship and make the internet safe from corrupt governments.

I am, however, incredibly grateful to Toast for believing in me and helping me bring this to your community.  I hope we can do something important.

On the Hangout portion I'll pm you and we'll get it figured out what time is best.  You will bring people in I assure you :)

As far as the poaching comment.  I will never forget your response to my often conspiratorial risk aversive banter not too long ago.  I'll never forget the point you made about the value of having decentralized DNS and that being your goal first and foremost.  I'm all in on this brother.  And though I own very few other altcoins, Namecoin is one I do own for the same reason.  There are some technologies that are very important no matter what kind of fanboy you are... Decentralized DNS is one of those.   
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline theoretical

Re: [Delegate Proposal] Indolering's .p2p Proposal Q&A
« Reply #13 on: January 23, 2015, 05:56:19 AM »

Didn't see this until it was on the bytemaster blog today [1].  indolering is more connected to mainstream projects than many of us (Mozilla, IETF, others).  He also knows some things about UI / UX, but neglected to mention it in the post.

I'd support him, but he doesn't seem to have actually registered delegate accounts yet.

[1] http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/delegate/2015/01/22/The-Road-to-Universal-p2p-Resolution/?r=theoreticalbts
BTS- theoretical / PTS- PZxpdC8RqWsdU3pVJeobZY7JFKVPfNpy5z / BTC- 1NfGejohzoVGffAD1CnCRgo9vApjCU2viY / the delegate formerly known as drltc / Nothing said on these forums is intended to be legally binding / All opinions are my own unless otherwise noted / Take action due to my posts at your own risk


 

Google+