I'd argue things like LNURL and Cashu are layer 3
Cashu is definitely a layer 3 as its protocol depends on being connected to a LN node with channels to the swarm. I'm dubious about its real use value due to the problem of disappearing mints, but yes it's a layer 3.
LNURL? Isn't this part of most LN node implementations? Isn't it really just a messaging system that uses the p2p network of LN? It interfaces to LN but it's really just an extension of the peer communication layer.
reply
LNURL is a separate spec from Lightning-proper, even if many/all nodes are using parts of it. Lightning has BOLTs, whereas LNURL has LUDs.
Because LNURL depends on HTTP stuff not the Lightning peer protocol, I'd say that's enough to call it a layer 3 -- you're using it as a separate protocol to make it easier to use and interoperate with lightning, which as a metaphor is like using DNS to make doing things over IP easier
reply
Ah, makes sense. And literally part of that relates to DNS, since LNURLs usually are tied to DNS addresses, though on the LN layer they don't have to be literally answering to that address to advertise it. I presume there is some kind of verification to stop false advertising in the protocol that probably involves a DNS record.
I'm not all that interested in name resolution systems, per se, except as far as to say that it would be great if there was a full layer 3 DNS registry built on bitcoin!
If things don't settle down between NATO and Russia there could even be a root split in DNS, Russia has got its own, separate system ready to go for this case. With a Bitcoin/LN powered name service, the entire "web5" ecosystem could be human friendly and not subject to the whims of thus far light touch on domain registration, which many governments can use to force DNS servers in their jurisdiction to force redirect and essentially steal a domain from a user for whatever incomprehensible reasons they do this for, DMCA being a common example in the past.
A DNS type registry running on Bitcoin/LN would also be able to provide more name types, and include hidden service addresses for anonymity networks with this capability, which would be pretty amazing.
reply
Don't you think a Namecoin sidechain on bitcoin could be easier and more censorship resistant than LN to address such hard task as permissionless global DNS ?
reply
With the relatively high latency that a name service requires it could be implemented as a sidechain, using anchor transactions in a similar way as the Cosmos IBC but adapted to cope with the probabalistic finality. Really, a bitcoin transaction is beyond practical reversal within the span of a day, which matches up with the existing latency of DNS database changes.
But hell, why can't we make it faster than that? I dunno about your experience doing web development and hosting but that delay is a pretty dang annoying thing.
reply
You could have some kind of self hosted electrum server for domains, that could be faster than requesting a remote peer
reply
Of course, and an SPV like Neutrino also.
Also just want to remark, that the 10-60 minute latency of on-chain confirmations of such data is still better than the 3-24 hours that you get with DNS. But why be satisfied with that when updates to the state can happen at the speed of Lightning???
reply
sounds good indeed! But you'll need to trade the simplicity of the timechain vs lightning management. I love using lightning but most people even IT people (myself included) rely on 3rd service providers for it. Lightning would need to get better tooling for people to be zen using sovereign lightning. can't be zeus and the buddha at the same time :p or maybe i'm too much of a pussy, just run that hot wallet jeeez!