0 sats \ 6 replies \ @l0k18 OP 23 Jan 2023 \ parent \ on: What is Layer 3? bitcoin
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.
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!
reply
Yeah, while payments for registrations make sense on LN, I'm not sure that registrations don't require the timechain. I think the secret sauce would be in the gap between paying for the update and propagating it to the users.
That might be where the problem of accounting for bandwidth costs comes in - perhaps it would be better if name resolutions came with a fee, and then propagating really current data becomes profitable.
Or maybe the fees could be paid to Indranet nodes providing this service, it is already in the plan that Indranet relays advertise services with per-service fee rates for exit traffic.
I really do think that when Indranet is fully realised it will form the layer 3, the first fully qualified L3 on top of the L2 of Lightning. If we can roll this little project out as soon as possible we might just manage to get that first mover advantage with a "good enough" solution that then becomes the foundation of further application systems that need incentives for hosting.
Proof of storage is a very difficult problem, many projects have aimed at it and failed (chia, storj, maidsafe). But proof of delivery is a less thorny problem, and amounts to the same thing as payment for delivery can fund storage and thus rewarded indirectly.
reply