777: XTRABYTES November Interview with Borazalom

Interview with Borazalom:

Here are the questions and answers from the 777.

1. What happened with the testnet? Was it successful or are you still working on the bug fixes? Should we expect a V2 of the testnet?

The last test result was a success but the failed tests also help the development. I wrote this because everyone must understand that the failed tests and successful tests are twins. Both are required.

After we get a successful test then if possible I use the passed code. Good example the XFUEL where I use the code the of first testnet. Each testnet have a goal and the lifetime is short. After destroyed the previous testnet then the next test will be executed.

The next testnet will be the public STaTiC+PoSign test. The next test we will use more testers therefore before we start the next test we need to build one small testing infrastructure where possible evaluate the results of tests. We need a small team who help and support the other testers.

2. What is the expected timeframe for setting up and auctioning the L1 nodes? Will that be aligned with the level 2 and 3 nodes?

After the STaTiC+PoSign test closed (where we use manual registered STaTiC-s ) then the next test will be the test of STaTiC registration. Each level ( L1,2,3) will be open. The original Level1 STaTiC-s was added to genesis block but all other positions will be available.

I don’t want to write deadline of tests but I hope to these tests will be closed this year. This also depends on the teams who help the execute and evaluate of tests. I hope the first teams will be available shortly.

If the STaTiC registration tests succeed then I will add this code to the system immediately. And all level of registrations will be available after.

3. Has the testnet proven that the technology works and is secure? Are the consensus mechanisms now fully tested?

We have more than just a success test. We have XFuel where the technology is publicly available. I hope the XFuel enough secure. 20.000 blocks done and nobody hacked the system.

The XFuel contain some finalized parts of the consensus but not each part. I will be adding more and more passed code until we get the final consensus. Of course, the final consensus is always changing.

The good system opening the door to the changes. I don’t want hardcoded consensus like the BTC block size problem or simile other.

4. How can we validate that XFuel uses the PoSign technology? Is there any technical proof to show how it works?

1.) Start XFuel Wallet and enter to debug console

Welcome to the XFuel RPC console.
Use up and down arrows to navigate history, and Ctrl-L to clear screen.
Type help for an overview of available commands.

2.) Type getinfo

getinfo

{
“version” : 1000001,
“protocolversion” : 10001,
“blocks” : 20012,
“timeoffset” : 0,
“connections” : 3,
“paytxfee” : 0.00000000,
“errors” : “”
}

3.) Get the hash of last block

getblockhash 20012

f6a45819b5393ccaec23195c012c91c4553b2999a49fb753129d6158dd3858ef

4.) Dump the detailed info of this block

getblock f6a45819b5393ccaec23195c012c91c4553b2999a49fb753129d6158dd3858ef

{
“hash” : “f6a45819b5393ccaec23195c012c91c4553b2999a49fb753129d6158dd3858ef”,
“confirmations” : 1,
“size” : 282,
“height” : 20012,
“version” : 1,
“merkleroot” : “cab3e8620645adb50a5a7bbe3d156105f64b51983353ee18036228ed0d55ebf5”,
“tx” : [
“cab3e8620645adb50a5a7bbe3d156105f64b51983353ee18036228ed0d55ebf5”
],
“time” : 1510086447,
“minerid” : 2,
“signature” : “3045022100a21645344d51435be6d032b44e6d847bfeffbb8c8681fea40a2cf0e5f7c16e4702205 2394414ad868339f434fdb8acfa779d85649d79f51e636036113c010781eaf2”,
“previousblockhash” : “10c85a6d2fced7b9c2d111eb87215c2ab06991916ef2c75c0dba992d6a801b79”
}

5.) You see the ID of miner who signed the block and the signature too. The last signer checked and accepted the all previous blocks too

5. Once PoSign is running, how are blocks created? Will block time remain the same? Like every 30s we’ll “mint” a new block via the static nodes? How do we ensure all transactions are verified by all nodes at the time of minting? We don’t make a new block until all transactions are agreed?

What if we have 2 servers on opposite sides of the world (Say JPY and UK) and it comes time to make a block… UK has no outstanding transactions so it creates it. Before JPY gets the block update it receives a transaction and sends it off to get approved by all servers… now we have a fork? How is this handled?

Each miner is watching a lot of different events, such as the number of transactions and elapsed time of last generated block, who generated the last block etc… Summarize the “value” of this event each block have one “weight”.

If we have 3 miners and each miner generate block in same time and the generator of the last generated block is the #1 miner then the weight of each block is different. The #1 weight is the worst and never be accept this block other miners because the previous block generator is also the #1. The #2 will be the best and the #3 also acceptable if #2 is offline or don’t generate block.

The block collision is a normal event. Each miner and client know what is the “best” block. The block of #2 maybe don’t contain all transactions but this is no problem. The next block will contain the missing transaction. Each block has unique weight therefore never created forks.

The chain always contains blocks ordered by weight.

6. Blockchain generation 3.0 is also about interpolarity, where Blockchains can talk to one another. Are there any future plans for the creation of a module for communication between the ethereum network, and other chains?

The system supports this, therefore, I hope someone will be create interpolarity module. The early stage of the system contains the bridge. This bridge connect the old chain and the new chain. These blockchains communicating with each other. The future interpolarity module just needs to extend this function to external blockchains.

7. The vision for XTRABYTES seems to be to make a better blockchain. So can you explain what you think are problems with the Blockchains that already exist and can you share very generally some long term hopes and vision you have for XTRABYTES into the future.

Lot of problems exist of the most blockchains. The problems of other blockchains and XBY don’t comparable at this moment, therefore, I just say some headwords:

  • Limited blocksize vs. unlimited blocksize
  • Lot of energy required vs. no extra energy required
  • Reward is given to miner vs. reward shared between the STaTiC ( service providers )
  • Unnecessary work ( mathematical calculation ) vs. required security checks
  • All blocks stored to all miners vs. cloud type shared storage
  • Fixed transaction cost  vs. service based cost ( cheap or zero transaction cost )
  • A limited number of transactions vs. extreme high number of transactions
  • Political governance problems ( not trust and anonym ) vs. provider releated and trust
  • p2p style network vs. overlay network

    and many more

And the answer of your non technical question is: Just read my first words of the beginning of this project. This is an experimental project. I just want a solid and stable platform who help the crypto world making better.

About John Potter

Copy Manager for XTRABYTES' Marketing Department since October 2017 (and XBY hodler since June 2017). John's earned degrees include an MBA, MA , and MLIS. Connect with him on Twitter or LinkedIn via [email protected]