2 ms·

Hence it is and should be named DLT. The "Distributed" separates it from merkle tree systems.

• SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
  Except that there are also "permissioned blockchains" which are non-distributed systems. Of course those are more an abuse of terminology to hype various services, but the term has appeared in the research literature. The consensus algorithm in such a blockchain is just "whatever blocks the controlling entity accepts into the canonical branch".
  • noxer 6y ago
    Permissioned in that case simply means private (you need a permission to participate). It does not mean non-distributed. It also doesn't mean any entity with permission can add anything and its accepted. That would just be a shared/synced database. A DTL still has rules and all participant collectively enforce them. Double spend is still prevented by the same technology. There must be some form of central authority to make it private but DLT limits the power of that authority, it can maybe add or remove participants and such stuff but it can not change the rules. Every participants would have to agree to run the new rules This is certainly useful to connect entries with shared balanced like banks who cooperate. Every bank still wants to validate for themself and not blindly trust whatever another bank writes on the ledger. Moving balanced form someone else or double spend is not possible in such a system, even trough all have the same permissions. A permissioned/private "blockchain" is still a DTL as long as the consensus enforcement is still distributed. If all participants have to trust all others to simply follow the rules then its not a DTL anymore.