Published on: 2022-05-03T08:25:22+00:00
John clarifies that he is not arguing for moving things from the edge or making Taro a BOLT. Instead, he explains that the capabilities needed for Taro to interact with LN should be designed to accommodate any outside layer/network. He gives specific examples of requirements that are new features for LN nodes and don't need to be network/layer-specific. ZmnSCPxj discusses Advertising Exchange Rates and Routing Between Channels Of Different Asset Types. For Advertising Exchange Rates, a particular odd featurebit can be defined without changing the BOLT protocol. For Routing Between Channels Of Different Asset Types, ZmnSCPxj suggests dropping the 'realm' byte and adding a new type for TLV. The change needs implementation from at least one other implementation.The speaker clarifies that they are not arguing for moving things from the edge or making Taro a BOLT. They explain that the capabilities needed for Taro to interact with LN should be designed to accommodate any outside layer/network. Examples include making LN nodes aware of assets on other networks, establishing commitments for atomic swapping, supporting exchange rates for asset pairs, and supporting multi-asset routes. The speaker emphasizes that they don't care about the framing as long as it is designed correctly to avoid being locked into one specific outside layer. The speaker argues that LN nodes need these features and they are not Taro-specific. The speaker also links to a discussion about the American Call Option problem when using H/PTLCs.In a recent email exchange, it was revealed that instead of updating the core network, the plan is to leave the protocol unchanged and add new TLV extensions for edges to be aware of and interact with Taro assets. This approach avoids the need to advertise exchange rates over the existing gossip protocol. Problems with H/PTLCs and American Call Options were also discussed, leading to the proposal of multi-asset "on the edge" as an alternative to widespread deployment in the published Lightning Network.Laolu believes that supporting tokens on Lightning should be a separate concern from Taro. He suggests creating a separate BOLT proposal to ensure LN standards have a genericized protocol. He proposes a bLIP that specifies TLV extensions needed to open channels using Taro assets and send them off-chain. Laolu argues that this doesn't need to be a BOLT as it won't be universal and won't be critical to the core LN network. He warns against making the same mistakes as Interledger and emphasizes the openness of Taro for implementation by anyone. He accepts contributions to his fork of the BIP repo and can be found on IRC at ##taro on Libera.John Carvalho, CEO of Synonym.to, has been researching and promoting tokens on Lightning for three years. He believes that if the Lightning Network can scale Bitcoin, it can also scale tokens on Bitcoin. He calls for Lightning Labs to create a separate BOLT proposal for supporting "tokens on Lightning" as a separate concern from Taro. He argues for a genericized protocol that can support multi-network, multi-asset LN-as-rails use cases, promoting fair competition and interoperability. Carvalho represents Synonym.to but hasn't finalized which token networks they will support.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T00:19:32.955040+00:00