elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
Aternate NXT 2.0 design. singapore
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Latest Stable Nxt Client: Nxt 1.12.2

Author Topic: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.  (Read 3805 times)

TheCoinWizard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +97/-55
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 614
  • Learn by questioning everything!
    • View Profile
Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« on: February 12, 2016, 12:45:51 pm »

This is just an alternative design idea for implementing childchains, which undoes all disadvages mentioned here...
https://nxtforum.org/core-development-discussion/nxt-2-0-design/msg209310/#msg209310

In no way will I be implementing this, or could I even, so it is up to the programmers to see if they like it enough to be willing to implement it this way.


- NXT stays the way it is, just get expanded with another feature: childchains

- Some new variables in the config file:
   -Support New childchains:  boolean that determines if you forge for new childchains
   -Numberofbootblocks: how many blocks you forge these childchains before they need to be included into the list below.
   -Childchains supported:   a list of all ids or hashes of the childchain this node forges.
   -Create Childchain fee: This forger will create a childchain for this nxt fee, could be zero.

- Nodes/forgers can choose which childchains blockchain they store, and thus forge upon.

- The creation/transaction fees of childchains are set in the childchains nomination like is with nxt now.

- The nxt forger collects these chaildchain tokens, and optionnaly trades them for nxt.

- The childchain is a clone of nxt, being forged according the allocation of nxt, but only by those nodes that want to forge it.

- The nxt childchain refers to the nxt blockchain to see which of it's childchain forgers has which relative stake.

- If you have a node with 1 nxt you could create and support/forge your own childchain, and thus possibly be the only having this blockchain. When the fees seem worthy enough another forger with 2 nxt might start forging on it as well. This is giving him 2/3 of the forging power on this chain.

- Blocktime could be set different per childchain.

- the childchain is the one referring to the nxt blockchain, not vica versa.

- Trading nxt for the childchaincoin (CCC) happens in phases. The CCC goes from account A to B conditionnaly. The condition being that the nxt goes from account B to A on the nxt blockchain.

- The nxt blockchain has no references to the childchains, hence does not get bloated from them, and there is no problem what zero value fees for transacting / creating childchains.

- Worthless childchains will die out once no single node and forger supports them

- Succesfull childchains will improve duplicity of their blockchain and security by having more and more nodes and forgers forging this coin.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2016, 12:49:09 pm by TheCoinWizard »
Logged
Welcome to the After Nxt Calendar era...
Which started in the year 222 of the French Republic, Frost month, on the fifth day of the first week, better known as the 2456621th Julian day,
even better known as 24 November 2013 at 12:00:00 UTC.

petko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +24/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2016, 03:37:47 pm »

If only some forgers are validating the child chain transactions, they will quickly be left on a fork when an invalid child chain transaction appears.

What you describe here can be done today with a message transaction holding the child block hash.
Logged

TheCoinWizard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +97/-55
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 614
  • Learn by questioning everything!
    • View Profile
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2016, 08:23:25 pm »

If only some forgers are validating the child chain transactions, they will quickly be left on a fork when an invalid child chain transaction appears.
Why is that? Invalid child chains transactions get refused by the child chain forgers, which are a subselection of the nxt forgers.
Quote
What you describe here can be done today with a message transaction holding the child block hash.
In this design only the child chain is refering to its parent chain, being nxt. The child chain is a clone, possibly also with some different parameters like time per block and optional components like MS, Asset Exchange, etc... It refers to the nxt chain only to see who can forge its chain and for what relative stake.
Nxt chain does not need to refer to its child, hence it does not bloat the nxt chain at all.
Today it is not easy for a non programmer to create such a copy, nor is there an easy interface to create such a childchain (aka clone)....
« Last Edit: February 12, 2016, 08:26:30 pm by TheCoinWizard »
Logged
Welcome to the After Nxt Calendar era...
Which started in the year 222 of the French Republic, Frost month, on the fifth day of the first week, better known as the 2456621th Julian day,
even better known as 24 November 2013 at 12:00:00 UTC.

petko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +24/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2016, 08:47:07 pm »

Aha, now I got it. Sorry.

It is dangerous to use the NXT distribution when forging the child chain. If e.g. 1000 nxt is forging the child chain, this means someone with say 100 000 nxt can reorganize the chain 100 blocks back in average.
Edit: Wrong! No need to have 100 000 nxt, 1000 is enough for 51% attack

Same would happen if today the nxt chain was itself forged by only 1000 nxt. It doesn't happen because the majority of nxt stakeholders have the incentive to protect their token. While they don't have the incentive to protect a child chain token.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2016, 05:43:51 pm by petko »
Logged

TheCoinWizard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +97/-55
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 614
  • Learn by questioning everything!
    • View Profile
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2016, 09:12:27 pm »

Why would I as a forger try to hurt or sabotage a childchain that respects gives forging rights to nxt holders???? It is as illogical as a nxt-forger trying to hurt nxt coins or a MS currency...
« Last Edit: February 12, 2016, 09:20:58 pm by TheCoinWizard »
Logged
Welcome to the After Nxt Calendar era...
Which started in the year 222 of the French Republic, Frost month, on the fifth day of the first week, better known as the 2456621th Julian day,
even better known as 24 November 2013 at 12:00:00 UTC.

petko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +24/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2016, 10:54:07 pm »

Why would I as a forger try to hurt or sabotage a childchain that respects gives forging rights to nxt holders???? It is as illogical as a nxt-forger trying to hurt nxt coins or a MS currency...
I mean that since the majority of nxt holders don't have the incentive to forge the childchain, this will make it a lot cheaper for an adversary to attack it.

The situation with the asset and MS currency transactions is slightly different - indeed some forgers may modify the code to not validate these transactions and safe a little CPU. But this way they risk their block to be rejected by other forgers and consequently lose the fees.
Logged

TheCoinWizard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +97/-55
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 614
  • Learn by questioning everything!
    • View Profile
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2016, 10:59:18 am »

Why would I as a forger try to hurt or sabotage a childchain that respects gives forging rights to nxt holders???? It is as illogical as a nxt-forger trying to hurt nxt coins or a MS currency...
I mean that since the majority of nxt holders don't have the incentive to forge the childchain, this will make it a lot cheaper for an adversary to attack it.

The situation with the asset and MS currency transactions is slightly different - indeed some forgers may modify the code to not validate these transactions and safe a little CPU. But this way they risk their block to be rejected by other forgers and consequently lose the fees.
That does seem the be the tradeoff to having everything a lot cheaper. As minimally one nxt node needs to be forging a childchain, and keeping its blockchain (or possibly only snapshot). Although the attacker could only temporary delay transactions. so if it would happen, it would be easy to fix. The worst damage would be that some transactions weren't confirmed, and the solution would be easy. Buy more nxt to secure your node forging the childchain. I don't think it will happen though as it doesn't make much economical sense.

Every nxt forger has incentive to forge every childchain, even in the boot period for collecting its fees and hoping that one day their might be someone willing to trade some nxt for it.
Though some childchains will have good rewards for forging resulting in lots of nodes and higher transaction costs,
some might choose to give medium rewards resulting in less nodes and less costs.
Childchains that don't reward their forgers cause they have to low real value of their transaction fees, or don't have transactions will be dropped by all forgers. Though the childchain could still keep forging it by having a nxt node running with 1000 nxt forging. This is helping to secure the nxt blockchain plus its own childchain.
Logged
Welcome to the After Nxt Calendar era...
Which started in the year 222 of the French Republic, Frost month, on the fifth day of the first week, better known as the 2456621th Julian day,
even better known as 24 November 2013 at 12:00:00 UTC.

Brangdon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +229/-25
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1389
  • Quality is addictive.
    • View Profile
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2016, 11:30:47 am »

Why would I as a forger try to hurt or sabotage a childchain that respects gives forging rights to nxt holders???? It is as illogical as a nxt-forger trying to hurt nxt coins or a MS currency...
Because "respect" butters no parsnips. They can profit far more by attacking the child-chain then by collecting fees from it, because they have no stake in it.

Although the attacker could only temporary delay transactions. so if it would happen, it would be easy to fix. The worst damage would be that some transactions weren't confirmed, and the solution would be easy. Buy more nxt to secure your node forging the childchain. I don't think it will happen though as it doesn't make much economical sense.
No; the attacker could also do double-spending. They can do everything a 51% attacker can do, because they have 99% of the forging power. They can reorganise the child-chain 100 blocks back, so they can issue a payment on the child-chain, take delivery of the goods, then change history so that the payment never happened and never can happen.

New chains having low security because few people are forging them, is a real problem for alt-coins in the Bitcoin world. Bitcoin miners have such massive forging power available, that they can trivially launch 51% attacks on any alt-coin that uses the same Proof of Work algorithm. It makes it harder for new PoW alt-coins to get big. As soon as they have value, someone attacks them to steal it. Hence they can never grow to rival Bitcoin unless they use a new algorithm for which there's no efficient hashing hardware, or unless they have rich sponsors who can ensure they have significant hashing power from launch. PoS has the same problem, except that you have to buy the stake. When the network is young, it has low value, and so is easy to attack.

This is the basic problem that Jean-Luc's proposal tries to solve. It enables small, low-value child-chains to have high-value security because they get their security from the high-value fNXT mother chain. It's a brilliant approach that will enable new things.
Logged

petko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +24/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2016, 03:49:32 pm »

Thanks, Brangdon. Indeed I missed to explain what the chain reorganization causes.

@CoinWizard, maybe the security in your proposal could be improved via proof of burn of NXT. It imitates POW where burning NXT is like buying a mining rig. Yet, as Brangdon mentioned, POW itself is not secure for young chains, and consequently proof of burn won't be either.

Anyways, it would be much more secure if the child chain uses its own stake when forging. I don't understand the benefit from using the NXT distribution versus simply starting NXT clone.
Logged

TheCoinWizard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +97/-55
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 614
  • Learn by questioning everything!
    • View Profile
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2016, 06:55:02 pm »

I was hoping someone else would point out the obvious, but since noone did, I guess I will.   

They can profit far more by attacking the child-chain then by collecting fees from it, because they have no stake in it.
Why would you think that?
I don't know many cryptocoins that have a total mining equipment worth 8 dollar, where it would pay of to do a double spend.
These coins are coins that are already worthless.

Such an attack is only worth the time of the attacker if the coins have value,
and coins that have the smallest of value will have a lot more stake value than 8 dollar, at least 8000 dollar or 1,000,000 nxt.
Especially in a situation where you don't have to exclusive focus the forging power of your nxt to one chain, unlike mining rigs in POW.
Yes, the 50M nxt forger might still extract a few dollars from doing a double spend on that childchain, but I am pretty sure that he wouldn't as it is obvious that he than endangers the future of nxt and the value of his 50M nxt
But even if I would be wrong it would still be easy to make new forging rules that limits the forging power (stake) increase on a childchain.

This is the basic problem that Jean-Luc's proposal tries to solve. It enables small, low-value child-chains to have high-value security because they get their security from the high-value fNXT mother chain. It's a brilliant approach that will enable new things.
This is already solved by the MS. What Jean-Luc tries to improve is the scalability of nxt, but with that he throws away the incentive for nodes to save and redistribute the transaction history saved in the complete childchain, and replaces it with snapshots.
Though I agree the availability improvement by using snapshots instead of complete blockchains might be a good option for some childchains where instant history retrieval isn't the focus. These childchains could afford even lower cost transaction, possibly free if subsidized by a block reward.

Even though you are able to understand my proposal good enough to attack it, it boggles my mind you are not able to appreciate the scalebility improvements in it.

@CoinWizard, maybe the security in your proposal could be improved via proof of burn of NXT. It imitates POW where burning NXT is like buying a mining rig. Yet, as Brangdon mentioned, POW itself is not secure for young chains, and consequently proof of burn won't be either.

No, Proof Of Burn is lot less secure than POS as it allows someone with only minuscule stake to get a high chance to forge a few block behind each other and thus makes it easier to do that double spend.
On top of that by the time the double spend is been executed, the attacker no longer has any stake left as he used it all to maximize his chances to succeed in the double spend.
He just runs away with the double spend profit without having any stake value loss.

Anyways, it would be much more secure if the child chain uses its own stake when forging.
True, but not everyone that wants to launch a coin is willing or even able to code a whole new cryptocurrency

I don't understand the benefit from using the NXT distribution versus simply starting NXT clone.
Besides the copyright issues, it is not really easy to an nxt clone, especially not after 1.5

The benefit for the nxt holders and forgers is that their coins gain the value for forging on other blockchains.
The benefit for the clone creator is that their coins keep getting updated and improved as nxt gets improved.
Besides the advantage of just filling in a graphical user interface to create a free coin...
« Last Edit: February 19, 2016, 07:06:49 pm by TheCoinWizard »
Logged
Welcome to the After Nxt Calendar era...
Which started in the year 222 of the French Republic, Frost month, on the fifth day of the first week, better known as the 2456621th Julian day,
even better known as 24 November 2013 at 12:00:00 UTC.

websioux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +69/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 343
  • Great changes grow bottom up
    • View Profile
    • Scriba.io the Blockchain Scribe
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2016, 11:38:52 am »

How do you solve the scalability problem ?
If you do, could you modify your OP to start with it because I don't see it ?

NXT 2.0 is only about scalability. Meta(fNXT) and childchains makes the proposed solution to the scalability problem.
They are not a desired feature.

If I read you well, your proposal is a childchain feature that may solve the complains but not the scalability problem.

Logged
Secret Miner <= communicate with style | NotBot <= timestamp digital docs

petko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +24/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Aternate NXT 2.0 design.
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2016, 05:42:02 pm »

If e.g. 1000 nxt is forging the child chain, this means someone with say 100 000 nxt can reorganize the chain 100 blocks back in average.

That's totally wrong! Of course with 50% of the forging power an attacker can reorganize all the 720 blocks. Don't know what was I thinking when I wrote that.
Logged
 

elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
assembly
assembly