Page 1 of 1

Side-chains - brainstorming

Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2014 1:21 pm
by virtual_master
Reading Adam Back's proposal about Bitcoin side-chains. ... 2014/04/10 ... de-chains/
I was also thinking on something similar for Namecoin longer time ago but i was not sure if it is a good idea. :)
Now I am thinking again about it.
What do you think about Namecoin side-chains ?

For ex.
d/ could use his own blockchain and id/ also
The remaining namespaces and Namecoin transactions would remain n the old blockchain.
Of course these blockchains should all use Namecoins as payment so they should interact in a smart way.

- the blockchain for domain browsing could be much smaller as only the d/ specific blockchain is required
- the blockchain for Namecoin ID identification(website logging, Bitmessage connections, Torchat connections, ..) could be much smaller as only the id/ specific blockchain is required so they could be downloaded specifically without requiring namecoind running
- eventually the remaining blockchain could be also smaller - better suited for payments
(this problems are discussed by the Bitcoin side-chain proposal also):
- security risks because of the hardfork
- eventually additional security risks in connection with the separated chains
- eventually problems motivating miners with the new systems
- eventually problems by merged mining(however this could appear also if Bitcoin will switch to side-chains and Namecoin not)

Re: Side-chains - brainstorming

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 9:28 am
by virtual_master
The discussions on the Bitcoin side-chains are going on: ... will_move/ ... _going_to/
Somebody asked if Zerocoin could be a side chain of Bitcoin: ... sidechain/
However that wouldn't be such a good idea - mixing a high anonymous system and a middle anonymous system would just compromise the anonymity of the higher system. Zerocoin's unsolved 'trusted seed' problem would be also exported to Bitcoin.
But what about Namecoin as side-chain of Bitcoin ?
I think that would work much better.
- merged mining as condition is already satisfied
- Bitcoin could profit from the Namecoin's own economy and Namecoin from Bitcoin's higher liquidity.
How ?
An automatic conversion between BTC and NMC could be implemented at a 1:1 rate so that if 1 NMC leaves the Namecoin blockchain it will appear 1 BTC in the Bitcoin blockchain and in the opposite direction also. So it would be the same currency but would have different names on each blockchain.

What do you think about ?

Re: Side-chains - brainstorming

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 5:30 pm
by phelix
I think it's a cool idea but it's also quite complex. ATM I'm happy that we share hash power with Bitcoin.

Re: Side-chains - brainstorming

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 7:56 pm
by virtual_master
phelix wrote:I think it's a cool idea but it's also quite complex. ATM I'm happy that we share hash power with Bitcoin.
:) YES
The second idea would be possible only with the support of the Bitcoin community and the Bitcoin developers.
Now came to my mind two other Namecoin side-chain ideas, each of them a fork of the previous two version.
- 1.a
By the first idea to separate the chains for d/ operations, id/ operations and transactions(+ other name operations) they are some potential problems which I thought how to eliminate and a came to a new solution.
The blockchain remains as it is without any fork which eliminates all risks related to the forking, parallel chaining and miner motivation.
How ?
As told before the blockchain remains but it will be created additionally 2 chains. For d/ (.bit domains) and for id/(Namecoin IDs).
But the creation should be not on the miner level but on the nodes level by the client.
Surely this would be a little bit longer then the 1. version but eliminates all disadvantages. And the d/ and id/ chains doesn't need to keep any more expired entries just the actual ones - the 1. version would keep all versions.
So this 2 additional chains wouldn't need more then 5-10% of the main chain.
When using a browser which needs to resolve .bit domains the addon needs to synchronize only with the .bit sidechain which would be only 2-5% of the all blockchain size.
By using a Namecoin ID connection from a third party messenger only the ID sidechain needs to synchronize which would be also much smaller.
- 2a
This version is supposing that Namecoin is a sidechain of Bitcoin and would use the sidechains from 1a for .bit and ID.