[ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform


"鲍舒恬 <baoshutian@...>
 

Hello everybody,

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.

- BitXHub
This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:
- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.
        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

- Our proposal

- Our whitepaper

Kind regards,
Shutian Bao


VIPIN BHARATHAN
 

Hi,
Interesting proposal. I am in the process of reading through this.
I have a question. When you talk about Pier, do you mean "Peer" or am I misunderstanding something?
I will have more comments as I get through the rest...
Thanks,

dlt.nyc
Vipin Bharathan
Digital Transformation Consultant
Financial Services (Blockchain, ML, Design Thinking)
vip@...


From: tsc@... <tsc@...> on behalf of "鲍舒恬 via Lists.Hyperledger.Org <baoshutian=hyperchain.cn@...>
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10:42 PM
To: tsc <tsc@...>
Cc: tsc@... <tsc@...>
Subject: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
 
Hello everybody,

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.

- BitXHub
This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:
- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.
        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

- Our proposal

- Our whitepaper

Kind regards,
Shutian Bao


Kuhrt, Tracy A.
 

Hi, Shutian Bao.

 

Thank you for the proposal. This proposal is similar to the work that is ongoing in the Blockchain Integration Framework (BIF) lab. I know that the BIF community is discussing different options for interoperability during their bi-weekly calls. Have you had an opportunity to sync up with that community to see if this work might fit with what they are doing?

 

Tracy

 

 

 

From: <tsc@...> on behalf of
Date: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:43 PM
To: tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:
汪小益 <wangxiaoyi@...>, 徐才巢 <xucaichao@...>, xzj19922010 <xzj19922010@...>
Subject: [External] [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments.


 

Hello everybody,

 

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.



- BitXHub

This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:

- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.

        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

 

- Our proposal

 

- Our whitepaper

 

Kind regards,

Shutian Bao

 




This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com


Arnaud Le Hors
 

I think Tracy is touching on a very important point. While it's exciting to see so many people interested in tackling the difficult and important problem of integration across blockchain platforms we ought to try and converge efforts where it makes sense. This means that we ought to understand how different proposals compare to one another and determine whether they warrant being pursued concurrently rather than through joining of efforts.

Note that I'm not saying that there is no room for BitXHub - I honestly haven't had a chance to read through the proposal yet so I have no opinion on that yet - but I do think that we ought not to duplicate efforts for the sake of it and so we absolutely need to understand how it compares to other efforts.

To be clear: I merely mean to state a general direction rather than express an opinion on BitXHub in particular.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "Kuhrt, Tracy A. via Lists.Hyperledger.Org" <tracy.a.kuhrt=accenture.com@...>
To:        ""鲍舒恬" <baoshutian@...>, tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:        tsc@...
Date:        02/05/2020 05:07 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
Sent by:        tsc@...



Hi, Shutian Bao.

 

Thank you for the proposal. This proposal is similar to the work that is ongoing in the Blockchain Integration Framework (BIF) lab. I know that the BIF community is discussing different options for interoperability during their bi-weekly calls. Have you had an opportunity to sync up with that community to see if this work might fit with what they are doing?

 

Tracy

 

 

 

From: <tsc@...> on behalf of
Date:
Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:43 PM
To:
tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:
汪小益<wangxiaoyi@...>, 徐才巢<xucaichao@...>, xzj19922010 <xzj19922010@...>
Subject:
[External] [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments.


 

Hello everybody,

 

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.


- BitXHub

    https://github.com/meshplus/bitxhub

This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:

- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.

        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

 

- Our proposal

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ORJGJSRraKSaO6Z-1zJcddFhxLynrR_skPW9LOVp1I/edit?usp=sharing

 

- Our whitepaper

    https://upload.hyperchain.cn/bitxhub_whitepaper.pdf

 

Kind regards,

Shutian Bao

 





This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at
https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com




Vipin Bharathan
 

Hello BitXHub folks,

Great to see this work, as interoperability is much discussed and needed as more and more chains proliferate as islands; even though there have been many proposals and implementations over the years.

(Cosmos, Tendermint, Unbounded, Coco?).  EEA launched its own interoperability efforts (they are only for Ethereum variants like Besu, Quorum etc.). There is the whole L2 stuff which is seen as interoperating value, also Ripple. You have called out some of these in your proposal.
There is also a Fabric Interoperability Working Group. An interoperability paper has been in the works in the Architecture working group, although work on this has stalled for some time.

As Tracy mentioned there is an ongoing effort through BIF in the labs. BitXHub has a well thought out proposal. Maybe they should make a presentation on one of the bi-weekly calls. Or since they already have a well-written proposal and an implentation, it can be used as the basis of a discussion. I have made some comments on the white-paper. The space between the originating chain and the destination chain (and the return path) is where BitXHub has created structures and standards for an interchain protocol.
I have some gaps in my understanding:
- The concept of a delay-chain in the proposal (Are these chains whose transactions are transported across the inter-chain protocols)
- App-chain: Is it a special peer in the originating or destination chain, stand as a proxy for the origin and destination?
- A naming and discovery system like DNS + registries and their propagation, how registration happens.
Maybe all this is available in the code which I have not looked through.

I see several possibilities:
1. Start a parallel lab to BIF, you can decide to join forces later
2. Join the BIF effort and contribute code and design to the effort
3. Apply for a project incubation- I see this as the least probable course at this point; however if people look at your code and design and say that they should work on this, it could result in an incubation.

There may be other choices.

I think this is a considerable work. Congratulations on trying to tackle one of the most difficult problems in this space.

Vipin


On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 12:24 PM Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:
I think Tracy is touching on a very important point. While it's exciting to see so many people interested in tackling the difficult and important problem of integration across blockchain platforms we ought to try and converge efforts where it makes sense. This means that we ought to understand how different proposals compare to one another and determine whether they warrant being pursued concurrently rather than through joining of efforts.

Note that I'm not saying that there is no room for BitXHub - I honestly haven't had a chance to read through the proposal yet so I have no opinion on that yet - but I do think that we ought not to duplicate efforts for the sake of it and so we absolutely need to understand how it compares to other efforts.

To be clear: I merely mean to state a general direction rather than express an opinion on BitXHub in particular.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "Kuhrt, Tracy A. via Lists.Hyperledger.Org" <tracy.a.kuhrt=accenture.com@...>
To:        ""鲍舒恬" <baoshutian@...>, tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:        tsc@...
Date:        02/05/2020 05:07 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
Sent by:        tsc@...



Hi, Shutian Bao.

 

Thank you for the proposal. This proposal is similar to the work that is ongoing in the Blockchain Integration Framework (BIF) lab. I know that the BIF community is discussing different options for interoperability during their bi-weekly calls. Have you had an opportunity to sync up with that community to see if this work might fit with what they are doing?

 

Tracy

 

 

 

From: <tsc@...> on behalf of
Date:
Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:43 PM
To:
tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:
汪小益<wangxiaoyi@...>, 徐才巢<xucaichao@...>, xzj19922010 <xzj19922010@...>
Subject:
[External] [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments.


 

Hello everybody,

 

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.


- BitXHub

    https://github.com/meshplus/bitxhub

This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:

- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.

        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

 

- Our proposal

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ORJGJSRraKSaO6Z-1zJcddFhxLynrR_skPW9LOVp1I/edit?usp=sharing

 

- Our whitepaper

    https://upload.hyperchain.cn/bitxhub_whitepaper.pdf

 

Kind regards,

Shutian Bao

 





This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at
https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com




"鲍舒恬 <baoshutian@...>
 

Hello Arnaud,

Thanks for reminding us of this matter, we're interested on the workflow and principle of BIF, and make a comparison between BIF and our BitXHub.
Actually we consider that BIF is still deficient in some ways:
  1. Each blockchain must implement various verification logics of heterogeneous interchain transactions, which is too complex for a participant ledger to develop.
  2. No middleman leads to a lack of track for the execution status of inter-chain transactions, which makes it difficult to guarantee the transactional consistency of inter-chain transactions.
  3. The receiver's verification of the legality of interchain transactions is too simple (just verify signatures).
On the contrary, BitXHub adopts the architecture (relay-chain + interchain gateway) which is quite different from BIT:
  1. We propose an efficient and pluggable validation engine in relay-chain s, every app-chain only needs to write its own verification logic and send it to the relay-chain, thus the legality of interchain transactions can be verified uniformly and efficiently.
  2. The relay-chain plays a role as a decentralized trusted middleman, and other blockchains interact through the relay-chain with interchain gateway. Moreover, relay-chains track the execution status of interchain transactions to ensure transactional consistency of interchain transactions, which greatly reduces costs of communication and trust.
We're waiting for more feedbacks and suggestions after your reading of our proposal!

Thanks,
BitXHub Team
 
 
------------------ Original ------------------
Date:  Thu, Feb 6, 2020 01:23 AM
To:  "tracy.a.kuhrt"<tracy.a.kuhrt@...>;
Cc:  "鲍舒恬"<baoshutian@...>; "tsc"<tsc@...>;
Subject:  RE: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
 
I think Tracy is touching on a very important point. While it's exciting to see so many people interested in tackling the difficult and important problem of integration across blockchain platforms we ought to try and converge efforts where it makes sense. This means that we ought to understand how different proposals compare to one another and determine whether they warrant being pursued concurrently rather than through joining of efforts.

Note that I'm not saying that there is no room for BitXHub - I honestly haven't had a chance to read through the proposal yet so I have no opinion on that yet - but I do think that we ought not to duplicate efforts for the sake of it and so we absolutely need to understand how it compares to other efforts.

To be clear: I merely mean to state a general direction rather than express an opinion on BitXHub in particular.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "Kuhrt, Tracy A. via Lists.Hyperledger.Org" <tracy.a.kuhrt=accenture.com@...>
To:        ""鲍舒恬" <baoshutian@...>, tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:        tsc@...
Date:        02/05/2020 05:07 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
Sent by:        tsc@...



Hi, Shutian Bao.

 

Thank you for the proposal. This proposal is similar to the work that is ongoing in the Blockchain Integration Framework (BIF) lab. I know that the BIF community is discussing different options for interoperability during their bi-weekly calls. Have you had an opportunity to sync up with that community to see if this work might fit with what they are doing?

 

Tracy

 

 

 

From: <tsc@...> on behalf of
Date:
Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:43 PM
To:
tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:
汪小益<wangxiaoyi@...>, 徐才巢<xucaichao@...>, xzj19922010 <xzj19922010@...>
Subject:
[External] [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments.


 

Hello everybody,

 

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.


- BitXHub

    https://github.com/meshplus/bitxhub

This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:

- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.

        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

 

- Our proposal

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ORJGJSRraKSaO6Z-1zJcddFhxLynrR_skPW9LOVp1I/edit?usp=sharing

 

- Our whitepaper

    https://upload.hyperchain.cn/bitxhub_whitepaper.pdf

 

Kind regards,

Shutian Bao

 





This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at
https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com




Vipin Bharathan
 

Hello BitXHub team,
Thanks for the answers. Please remember to reply all to include the community in the discussions.

1. App-chain(s) are the ones that interact. When they connect to the Pier, do they use IBTP in all cases, or are the Pier's joining the App-chain network? All the nodes in the App-chain are unaware of the fact that they could be interacting with another chain through the inter blockchain technology platform?

2. Can you make the isomorphic versus heterogeneous app-chain distinction clearer. My understanding from reading the whitepaper is that if app-chainA and app-chainB both implement the BitXHub protocol, then they are isomorphic; otherwise heterogeneous. What are the differences needed to connect two Fabric networks vs. connecting a Fabric network to a Besu network? In other words you create a new consensus layer (with multiple Piers) when the originating App-Chain uses eventual consistency vs deterministic consistency. This does not come through clearly for me.

In short, if I want to implement cross chain communication between two networks; can I leave the code for the nodes (i.e. in the case of fabric, endorsers and validators) unchanged?

Best,
Vipin Bharathan


On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 8:55 AM 鲍舒恬 <baoshutian@...> wrote:
Hello Vipin,

Thanks for your suggestions! And the following is a brief explanation about your questions:

- Relay-chains: actually there are two types of transactions in these chains. One is system transaction, which handles the internal operations such as app-chain management, including app-chain registration, audit and deletion. Another is interchain transaction, when detected in app-chain, they will be converted by Pier into the payload of transactions meeting the requirements of IBTP.

- App-chains: an app-chain represents a whole blockchain like Fabric or Ethereum. To achieve the function of proxying and routing inter-chain transactions, pier is introduced.

- Registration: 
  • To protect BitXHub from malicious app-chains, the app-chain willing to join BitXHub has to register first. As for registering, app-chains need to prepare some information about itself, including a unique ID derived from its private key, its validators infos, and self-defined name and blockchain type(fabric or something else).  And the uniqueness of this ID can be used by the relay-chain to route interchain transactions from different senders. 
  • After registering info sent to BitXHub, an audit mechanism is introduced to block out unrecognized and malicious app-chains. BitXHub needs to check if the ID of the app-chain is valid and the authenticity of its validators.Only after registering, interchain transactions from this app-chain will be processed.
Thanks,
BitXHub Team
 
------------------ Original ------------------
From:  "Vipin Bharathan"<vipinsun@...>;
Date:  Thu, Feb 6, 2020 05:00 AM
To:  "Arnaud Le Hors"<lehors@...>;
Cc:  "Tracy Kuhrt"<tracy.a.kuhrt@...>; "鲍舒恬"<baoshutian@...>; "Hyperledger List"<tsc@...>;
Subject:  Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
 
Hello BitXHub folks,

Great to see this work, as interoperability is much discussed and needed as more and more chains proliferate as islands; even though there have been many proposals and implementations over the years.

(Cosmos, Tendermint, Unbounded, Coco?).  EEA launched its own interoperability efforts (they are only for Ethereum variants like Besu, Quorum etc.). There is the whole L2 stuff which is seen as interoperating value, also Ripple. You have called out some of these in your proposal.
There is also a Fabric Interoperability Working Group. An interoperability paper has been in the works in the Architecture working group, although work on this has stalled for some time.

As Tracy mentioned there is an ongoing effort through BIF in the labs. BitXHub has a well thought out proposal. Maybe they should make a presentation on one of the bi-weekly calls. Or since they already have a well-written proposal and an implentation, it can be used as the basis of a discussion. I have made some comments on the white-paper. The space between the originating chain and the destination chain (and the return path) is where BitXHub has created structures and standards for an interchain protocol.
I have some gaps in my understanding:
- The concept of a delay-chain in the proposal (Are these chains whose transactions are transported across the inter-chain protocols)
- App-chain: Is it a special peer in the originating or destination chain, stand as a proxy for the origin and destination?
- A naming and discovery system like DNS + registries and their propagation, how registration happens.
Maybe all this is available in the code which I have not looked through.

I see several possibilities:
1. Start a parallel lab to BIF, you can decide to join forces later
2. Join the BIF effort and contribute code and design to the effort
3. Apply for a project incubation- I see this as the least probable course at this point; however if people look at your code and design and say that they should work on this, it could result in an incubation.

There may be other choices.

I think this is a considerable work. Congratulations on trying to tackle one of the most difficult problems in this space.

Vipin


On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 12:24 PM Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...> wrote:
I think Tracy is touching on a very important point. While it's exciting to see so many people interested in tackling the difficult and important problem of integration across blockchain platforms we ought to try and converge efforts where it makes sense. This means that we ought to understand how different proposals compare to one another and determine whether they warrant being pursued concurrently rather than through joining of efforts.

Note that I'm not saying that there is no room for BitXHub - I honestly haven't had a chance to read through the proposal yet so I have no opinion on that yet - but I do think that we ought not to duplicate efforts for the sake of it and so we absolutely need to understand how it compares to other efforts.

To be clear: I merely mean to state a general direction rather than express an opinion on BitXHub in particular.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "Kuhrt, Tracy A. via Lists.Hyperledger.Org" <tracy.a.kuhrt=accenture.com@...>
To:        ""鲍舒恬" <baoshutian@...>, tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:        tsc@...
Date:        02/05/2020 05:07 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
Sent by:        tsc@...



Hi, Shutian Bao.

 

Thank you for the proposal. This proposal is similar to the work that is ongoing in the Blockchain Integration Framework (BIF) lab. I know that the BIF community is discussing different options for interoperability during their bi-weekly calls. Have you had an opportunity to sync up with that community to see if this work might fit with what they are doing?

 

Tracy

 

 

 

From: <tsc@...> on behalf of
Date:
Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:43 PM
To:
tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:
汪小益<wangxiaoyi@...>, 徐才巢<xucaichao@...>, xzj19922010 <xzj19922010@...>
Subject:
[External] [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments.


 

Hello everybody,

 

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.


- BitXHub

    https://github.com/meshplus/bitxhub

This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:

- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.

        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

 

- Our proposal

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ORJGJSRraKSaO6Z-1zJcddFhxLynrR_skPW9LOVp1I/edit?usp=sharing

 

- Our whitepaper

    https://upload.hyperchain.cn/bitxhub_whitepaper.pdf

 

Kind regards,

Shutian Bao

 





This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at
https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com




hmontgomery@us.fujitsu.com <hmontgomery@...>
 

Hi BitXHub Team,

 

Thank you for your responses.  It’s always nice to see more people interested in blockchain integration.

 

At Fujitsu, we have also built a blockchain interoperability platform.  It’s quite similar to yours, actually—much more so than the current, main BIF platform which was contributed by Accenture.  We use a “middleman blockchain” which you refer to as a relay-chain in order to manage interchain transactions in a way that is probably very similar to what you are doing (although I haven’t dug deeply into your code, so I could be wrong).  You can view it here: 

https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/blockchain-integration-framework/tree/master/packages/connection-chain

 

As you can see, we have contributed this to the BIF lab and made the decision to work together with the Accenture folks (and any others that care to join) on blockchain interoperability.  Despite some core architectural differences, we think there are a lot of core functionalities that will be common to both our (and your) “middleman blockchain” approach and Accenture’s “overlay” approach.  Ideally, we could come up with a set of modular components that allow anyone to set up a blockchain integration platform that meets their specifications.  Maybe this is too ambitious, but we think that it is worth trying.

 

I’d also like to respond to your comments on the BIF.  I certainly don’t think it is necessarily deficient, but just that different design decisions have been made.

 

>>>   Each blockchain must implement various verification logics of heterogeneous interchain transactions, which is too complex for a participant ledger to develop.

 

The alternative is what you are seemingly doing (please correct me if I’m wrong):  build a language for contracts that runs on top of all blockchains.  From my perspective, this will require a separate shim for every different blockchain, meaning that it will also be complicated to develop.  Is this the correct assumption?  I do agree with you that some sort of universal verification language is probably the best way to go, and I think this is where the BIF project is headed (although I can’t speak for everyone or for certain).  You may want to ask some of the core BIF guys like Peter and Jonathan what they think about this.  But the fact that everyone (and all code involved) in a transaction across multiple chains needs to know the semantics of transactions in all of the chains involved is something that is certainly clear.

 

>>>  No middleman leads to a lack of track for the execution status of inter-Hi chain transactions, which makes it difficult to guarantee the transactional consistency of inter-chain transactions.

 

A middleman can often be viewed as a drawback.  Indeed, I think Accenture’s overlay network requires less trust overall than ConnectionChain or your solution since you don’t have to trust an additional middleman network, which may be much smaller or less trustworthy than the networks it is connecting.  The overlay network certainly has issues—it can’t work with cryptocurrencies or, more generally, proof of work based systems.  But it has definite benefits for connecting large, permissioned networks.

 

>>>  The receiver's verification of the legality of interchain transactions is too simple (just verify signatures).

 

It’s fine for an overlay network, where the overlay nodes will have to be familiar with transaction execution on both blockchains involved in a transaction.  I guess your opinion here depends on whether you want the client or the protocol to be responsible for ensuring the transaction semantics are correct across blockchains.

 

>>>   We propose an efficient and pluggable validation engine in relay-chain s, every app-chain only needs to write its own verification logic and send it to the relay-chain, thus the legality of interchain transactions can be verified uniformly and efficiently.

 

This is something I’d definitely be interested in seeing in more detail.  I can’t view your whitepaper at work (a lot of .cn sites are blocked unnecessarily, including some universities and typically even the Asiacrypt submission website (!!) which causes me a lot of grief) so maybe you address that in there.  If it is expressive enough to handle most transactions and easy to implement on a lot of different blockchains, it would be a very nice contribution.

 

>>>   The relay-chain plays a role as a decentralized trusted middleman, and other blockchains interact through the relay-chain with interchain gateway. Moreover, relay-chains track the execution status of interchain transactions to ensure transactional consistency of interchain transactions, which greatly reduces costs of communication and trust.

 

Again, this is very similar to the ConnectionChain design.  You may want to take a look.

 

Thanks again for your time, your interest in this topic, and for coming to Hyperledger with a proposal.  Please let me know what you think about what I’ve said here—I’d love to hear your feedback.

 

Thanks a lot for your time, and have a great day.

 

Thanks,

Hart

 

 

 

From: tsc@... [mailto:tsc@...] On Behalf Of "???
Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 6:14 AM
To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>; tracy.a.kuhrt <tracy.a.kuhrt@...>
Cc: tsc <tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

Hello Arnaud,

 

Thanks for reminding us of this matter, we're interested on the workflow and principle of BIF, and make a comparison between BIF and our BitXHub.

Actually we consider that BIF is still deficient in some ways:

  1. Each blockchain must implement various verification logics of heterogeneous interchain transactions, which is too complex for a participant ledger to develop.
  2. No middleman leads to a lack of track for the execution status of inter-Hi chain transactions, which makes it difficult to guarantee the transactional consistency of inter-chain transactions.
  3. The receiver's verification of the legality of interchain transactions is too simple (just verify signatures).

On the contrary, BitXHub adopts the architecture (relay-chain + interchain gateway) which is quite different from BIT:

  1. We propose an efficient and pluggable validation engine in relay-chain s, every app-chain only needs to write its own verification logic and send it to the relay-chain, thus the legality of interchain transactions can be verified uniformly and efficiently.
  2. The relay-chain plays a role as a decentralized trusted middleman, and other blockchains interact through the relay-chain with interchain gateway. Moreover, relay-chains track the execution status of interchain transactions to ensure transactional consistency of interchain transactions, which greatly reduces costs of communication and trust.

We're waiting for more feedbacks and suggestions after your reading of our proposal!

 

Thanks,

BitXHub Team

 

 

------------------ Original ------------------

Date:  Thu, Feb 6, 2020 01:23 AM

To:  "tracy.a.kuhrt"<tracy.a.kuhrt@...>;

Cc:  "鲍舒恬"<baoshutian@...>; "tsc"<tsc@...>;

Subject:  RE: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

I think Tracy is touching on a very important point. While it's exciting to see so many people interested in tackling the difficult and important problem of integration across blockchain platforms we ought to try and converge efforts where it makes sense. This means that we ought to understand how different proposals compare to one another and determine whether they warrant being pursued concurrently rather than through joining of efforts.

Note that I'm not saying that there is no room for BitXHub - I honestly haven't had a chance to read through the proposal yet so I have no opinion on that yet - but I do think that we ought not to duplicate efforts for the sake of it and so we absolutely need to understand how it compares to other efforts.

To be clear: I merely mean to state a general direction rather than express an opinion on BitXHub in particular.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "Kuhrt, Tracy A. via Lists.Hyperledger.Org" <tracy.a.kuhrt=accenture.com@...>
To:        ""鲍舒恬" <baoshutian@...>, tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:        tsc@...
Date:        02/05/2020 05:07 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
Sent by:        tsc@...


 

Hi, Shutian Bao.

 

Thank you for the proposal. This proposal is similar to the work that is ongoing in the Blockchain Integration Framework (BIF) lab. I know that the BIF community is discussing different options for interoperability during their bi-weekly calls. Have you had an opportunity to sync up with that community to see if this work might fit with what they are doing?

 

Tracy

 

 

 

From: <tsc@...> on behalf of
Date:
Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:43 PM
To:
tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:
汪小益<wangxiaoyi@...>, 徐才巢<xucaichao@...>, xzj19922010 <xzj19922010@...>
Subject:
[External] [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments.


 

Hello everybody,

 

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.

 

- BitXHub

    https://github.com/meshplus/bitxhub

This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:

- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.

        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

 

- Our proposal

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ORJGJSRraKSaO6Z-1zJcddFhxLynrR_skPW9LOVp1I/edit?usp=sharing

 

- Our whitepaper

    https://upload.hyperchain.cn/bitxhub_whitepaper.pdf

 

Kind regards,

Shutian Bao

 

 



This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at
https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com




Somogyvari, Peter
 

Hi BitXHub Team,


Welcome!
BIF maintainer here. 
Just wanted to add to what others have already said that I'm also looking forward to hearing more of your solution and the lower level/technical details. Would be great if you could join one of our bi-weekly calls as well.
Also, wanted to make sure it is being said that you are most welcome to join our (BIF) efforts if you wish to do so and that I'm more than happy to work with you on bringing in existing code that you may wish to contribute (if this would be something that you are interested in of course). 
It's not a trivial process, but it's well worth the effort in my opinion:

Bringing in new code/ideas/concepts is a great litmus test for the plugin architecture's flexibility which is one of our main areas of focus because it's hard to predict the future direction of technology and we'd rather have something that bends rather than breaks on the long run as things inevitably change. 
The more eyes we have on the design the higher the probability of us succeeding in the latter goal and so I'm definitely grateful for the feedback so far and hope that maybe we end up working together in the future.


Kind regards,
Peter

Peter Somogyvari

Technology Architect

Accenture Products & Platforms (APP)

Office: +1 (415) 537-5541

Mobile: +1 (650) 488-1741



From: tsc@... <tsc@...> on behalf of hmontgomery@... <hmontgomery@...>
Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 11:45 AM
To: "鲍舒恬 <baoshutian@...>; Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>; Kuhrt, Tracy A. <tracy.a.kuhrt@...>
Cc: tsc <tsc@...>
Subject: [External] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
 

Hi BitXHub Team,

 

Thank you for your responses.  It’s always nice to see more people interested in blockchain integration.

 

At Fujitsu, we have also built a blockchain interoperability platform.  It’s quite similar to yours, actually—much more so than the current, main BIF platform which was contributed by Accenture.  We use a “middleman blockchain” which you refer to as a relay-chain in order to manage interchain transactions in a way that is probably very similar to what you are doing (although I haven’t dug deeply into your code, so I could be wrong).  You can view it here: 

https://github.com/hyperledger-labs/blockchain-integration-framework/tree/master/packages/connection-chain

 

As you can see, we have contributed this to the BIF lab and made the decision to work together with the Accenture folks (and any others that care to join) on blockchain interoperability.  Despite some core architectural differences, we think there are a lot of core functionalities that will be common to both our (and your) “middleman blockchain” approach and Accenture’s “overlay” approach.  Ideally, we could come up with a set of modular components that allow anyone to set up a blockchain integration platform that meets their specifications.  Maybe this is too ambitious, but we think that it is worth trying.

 

I’d also like to respond to your comments on the BIF.  I certainly don’t think it is necessarily deficient, but just that different design decisions have been made.

 

>>>   Each blockchain must implement various verification logics of heterogeneous interchain transactions, which is too complex for a participant ledger to develop.

 

The alternative is what you are seemingly doing (please correct me if I’m wrong):  build a language for contracts that runs on top of all blockchains.  From my perspective, this will require a separate shim for every different blockchain, meaning that it will also be complicated to develop.  Is this the correct assumption?  I do agree with you that some sort of universal verification language is probably the best way to go, and I think this is where the BIF project is headed (although I can’t speak for everyone or for certain).  You may want to ask some of the core BIF guys like Peter and Jonathan what they think about this.  But the fact that everyone (and all code involved) in a transaction across multiple chains needs to know the semantics of transactions in all of the chains involved is something that is certainly clear.

 

>>>  No middleman leads to a lack of track for the execution status of inter-Hi chain transactions, which makes it difficult to guarantee the transactional consistency of inter-chain transactions.

 

A middleman can often be viewed as a drawback.  Indeed, I think Accenture’s overlay network requires less trust overall than ConnectionChain or your solution since you don’t have to trust an additional middleman network, which may be much smaller or less trustworthy than the networks it is connecting.  The overlay network certainly has issues—it can’t work with cryptocurrencies or, more generally, proof of work based systems.  But it has definite benefits for connecting large, permissioned networks.

 

>>>  The receiver's verification of the legality of interchain transactions is too simple (just verify signatures).

 

It’s fine for an overlay network, where the overlay nodes will have to be familiar with transaction execution on both blockchains involved in a transaction.  I guess your opinion here depends on whether you want the client or the protocol to be responsible for ensuring the transaction semantics are correct across blockchains.

 

>>>   We propose an efficient and pluggable validation engine in relay-chain s, every app-chain only needs to write its own verification logic and send it to the relay-chain, thus the legality of interchain transactions can be verified uniformly and efficiently.

 

This is something I’d definitely be interested in seeing in more detail.  I can’t view your whitepaper at work (a lot of .cn sites are blocked unnecessarily, including some universities and typically even the Asiacrypt submission website (!!) which causes me a lot of grief) so maybe you address that in there.  If it is expressive enough to handle most transactions and easy to implement on a lot of different blockchains, it would be a very nice contribution.

 

>>>   The relay-chain plays a role as a decentralized trusted middleman, and other blockchains interact through the relay-chain with interchain gateway. Moreover, relay-chains track the execution status of interchain transactions to ensure transactional consistency of interchain transactions, which greatly reduces costs of communication and trust.

 

Again, this is very similar to the ConnectionChain design.  You may want to take a look.

 

Thanks again for your time, your interest in this topic, and for coming to Hyperledger with a proposal.  Please let me know what you think about what I’ve said here—I’d love to hear your feedback.

 

Thanks a lot for your time, and have a great day.

 

Thanks,

Hart

 

 

 

From: tsc@... [mailto:tsc@...] On Behalf Of "???
Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 6:14 AM
To: Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@...>; tracy.a.kuhrt <tracy.a.kuhrt@...>
Cc: tsc <tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

Hello Arnaud,

 

Thanks for reminding us of this matter, we're interested on the workflow and principle of BIF, and make a comparison between BIF and our BitXHub.

Actually we consider that BIF is still deficient in some ways:

  1. Each blockchain must implement various verification logics of heterogeneous interchain transactions, which is too complex for a participant ledger to develop.
  2. No middleman leads to a lack of track for the execution status of inter-Hi chain transactions, which makes it difficult to guarantee the transactional consistency of inter-chain transactions.
  3. The receiver's verification of the legality of interchain transactions is too simple (just verify signatures).

On the contrary, BitXHub adopts the architecture (relay-chain + interchain gateway) which is quite different from BIT:

  1. We propose an efficient and pluggable validation engine in relay-chain s, every app-chain only needs to write its own verification logic and send it to the relay-chain, thus the legality of interchain transactions can be verified uniformly and efficiently.
  2. The relay-chain plays a role as a decentralized trusted middleman, and other blockchains interact through the relay-chain with interchain gateway. Moreover, relay-chains track the execution status of interchain transactions to ensure transactional consistency of interchain transactions, which greatly reduces costs of communication and trust.

We're waiting for more feedbacks and suggestions after your reading of our proposal!

 

Thanks,

BitXHub Team

 

 

------------------ Original ------------------

From:  "Arnaud Le Hors"<lehors@...>;

Date:  Thu, Feb 6, 2020 01:23 AM

To:  "tracy.a.kuhrt"<tracy.a.kuhrt@...>;

Cc:  "鲍舒恬"<baoshutian@...>; "tsc"<tsc@...>;

Subject:  RE: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

I think Tracy is touching on a very important point. While it's exciting to see so many people interested in tackling the difficult and important problem of integration across blockchain platforms we ought to try and converge efforts where it makes sense. This means that we ought to understand how different proposals compare to one another and determine whether they warrant being pursued concurrently rather than through joining of efforts.

Note that I'm not saying that there is no room for BitXHub - I honestly haven't had a chance to read through the proposal yet so I have no opinion on that yet - but I do think that we ought not to duplicate efforts for the sake of it and so we absolutely need to understand how it compares to other efforts.

To be clear: I merely mean to state a general direction rather than express an opinion on BitXHub in particular.
--
Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Blockchain & Web Open Technologies - IBM




From:        "Kuhrt, Tracy A. via Lists.Hyperledger.Org" <tracy.a.kuhrt=accenture.com@...>
To:        ""鲍舒恬" <baoshutian@...>, tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:        tsc@...
Date:        02/05/2020 05:07 PM
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform
Sent by:        tsc@...


 

Hi, Shutian Bao.

 

Thank you for the proposal. This proposal is similar to the work that is ongoing in the Blockchain Integration Framework (BIF) lab. I know that the BIF community is discussing different options for interoperability during their bi-weekly calls. Have you had an opportunity to sync up with that community to see if this work might fit with what they are doing?

 

Tracy

 

 

 

From: <tsc@...> on behalf of
Date:
Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 8:43 PM
To:
tsc <tsc@...>
Cc:
汪小益<wangxiaoyi@...>, 徐才巢<xucaichao@...>, xzj19922010 <xzj19922010@...>
Subject:
[External] [Hyperledger TSC] [ Hyperledger ] Proposal - BitXHub: inter-blockchain technology platform

 

This message is from an EXTERNAL SENDER - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments.


 

Hello everybody,

 

We'd like to propose a universal inter-blockchain technology platform 'BitXHub'. Our current main efforts are focused on improvement of flexibility, high availability and scalability. If we could get some feedback on our proposed design from members involved in Hyperledger TSC, it'll be quite useful for further improvement of BitXHub.

 

- BitXHub

    https://github.com/meshplus/bitxhub

This enhancement for Hyperledger is aiming to:

- Provide interactions among ledger projects (e.g., Fabric, Sawtooth and Iroha) in Hyperledger community when applied in different scenarios.

        - Support interchain transactions including asset exchange, information sharing and service complementation.

 

- Our proposal

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/14ORJGJSRraKSaO6Z-1zJcddFhxLynrR_skPW9LOVp1I/edit?usp=sharing

 

- Our whitepaper

    https://upload.hyperchain.cn/bitxhub_whitepaper.pdf

 

Kind regards,

Shutian Bao

 

 



This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the e-mail by you is prohibited. Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment of internal compliance with Accenture policy. Your privacy is important to us. Accenture uses your personal data only in compliance with data protection laws. For further information on how Accenture processes your personal data, please see our privacy statement at
https://www.accenture.com/us-en/privacy-policy.
______________________________________________________________________________________

www.accenture.com