-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 409
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
IBC architecture document #70
Conversation
The one thing that's not easily understandable from this set of documents is why you presume future IBC topology to be complex and not, say, complete graph: reading how permissionless it is you certainly don't understand where that hub and spoke model in examples comes from. It's be nice to have list of reasons to limit connections to only well-known well-behaving networks or a discriminating hub - namely expensive on-chain storage, reducing counterparty risk and so on. I'm not sure that speculations on how and why IBC network will shape itself should be in this PR though. |
I agree that it's worthwhile to reason about future network topologies, but I think it is out of scope of this document and the core protocol specification generally - but it could well be in scope for "example topology" documents and analysis in the future, in this repo if you like - some discussion has started at #59. |
I believe all comments have been addressed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this gives a really good overview on the motivation and on IBC 👍
I think the flow diagram (in the Diagram section) could still be clearer (maybe by boxing the different layers similarly to how they are structured under the "Protocol Relations" section.
Other than that: great work!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just a nit, otherwise LGTM
Co-Authored-By: cwgoes <cwgoes@pluranimity.org>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Amazing work!
Merging now, but more comments / suggestions always welcome. |
Update per suggestions from @ancazamfir and @milosevic:
Also fix a few links.
Feedback welcome, both on clarity of this writing and any conceptual explanations you think are missing.