4 ms·

Unique node lists (UNLs) are simply lists of nodes someone provides that they think meets their standards. Everyone can publish an UNL, it doesn't give any powe

by noxer 5y ago

Unique node lists (UNLs) are simply lists of nodes someone provides that they think meets their standards. Everyone can publish an UNL, it doesn't give any power or requires any privilege. If you run a node you can use one or many UNLs or make you own. There are 3 UNLs published at the time of writing. https://xrpl.org/technical-faq.html#what-are-unique-node-lists-unls https://xrpl.org/technical-faq.html#what-are-unique-node-lis... >Ripple CTO claimed XRP might be more decentralized than BTC Hows that relevant he can assume whatever he wants ryt? We can not measure decentralization in a meaningful way. His guess is as good as yours. BTW hes a Bitcoin developer. Also I assume what he meant to say with that is that China could gain control over 50+% of the mining power. On the XRPL no country could seize control or more accurately they could but it would not have any effect. Double spends are not possible by gaining control over 50+%. You could only trick the nodes you control which is literally as useless as it sounds. And ofc all other nodes would simply ignore any node that is assumed to be compromised or malfunctioning. The BTC network cant "ignore miners". If it would be know that someone has 50+% hash power there would be no solution.

gruez 5y ago
>Unique node lists (UNLs) are simply lists of nodes someone provides that they think meets their standards. Everyone can publish an UNL, it doesn't give any power or requires any privilege. If you run a node you can use one or many UNLs or make you own. doesn't using your own UNL basically equate to a hard fork in the event that the nodes don't agree?
- noxer 5y ago
  >doesn't using your own UNL basically equate to a hard fork in the event that the nodes don't agree? Short answer: No, if one or a few dont agree they are just ignored. If the majority (>50%) does then it halts and if a quorum is reached (>80%) it could fork. long answer: Its complicated. Under normal conditions nothing happens but in edge cases (large node outages/physical disconnection/like if and undersea cable is cut) it could fragment. This can be avoided if the core of the nodes mostly has each other on the UNL. But since we cant and most importantly should not enforce that its encourages to create and publish an UNL if you think the existing UNLs are not good. Its also encourages to use an UNL with large overlap to other UNLs This leads to the assumption that almost everyone uses one of the published UNLs with minor changes (mostly additions) else if you had mayor changes you would publish an UNL to convince other to also drop/add specific nodes (after all if you have a reason you probably want to tell everyone) Since the UNLs overlap the real nodes UNLs should too and forking is not possible with large overlap. On a high overlap it could only halt if too many nodes are separated/offline which is the wanted behavior rather than making uncertain progress. There is a amendment coming (most likely) for negative UNL where nodes can signal that they lost contact to a node and temporary remove it form the UNL. This would reduce the risk of halting if large percentage of nodes are temporary lost. Instead of 20% it would tolerate more nodes to go offline before the network would halt. It basically adjust the 80% quorum requirement down with every node that goes offline but has a minimum of 60% of the original 100%. 60% is the minimum to prevent forking/fragmenting again. only 51% would be needed if the UNLs would had perfect 100% overlap, so its a bit higher to compensate for the fact that UNLs dont have 100% overlap. https://xrpl.org/negative-unl.html https://xrpl.org/negative-unl.html

by noxer 5y ago

gruez 5y ago

>Unique node lists (UNLs) are simply lists of nodes someone provides that they think meets their standards. Everyone can publish an UNL, it doesn't give any power or requires any privilege. If you run a node you can use one or many UNLs or make you own. doesn't using your own UNL basically equate to a hard fork in the event that the nodes don't agree?

noxer 5y ago
>doesn't using your own UNL basically equate to a hard fork in the event that the nodes don't agree? Short answer: No, if one or a few dont agree they are just ignored. If the majority (>50%) does then it halts and if a quorum is reached (>80%) it could fork. long answer: Its complicated. Under normal conditions nothing happens but in edge cases (large node outages/physical disconnection/like if and undersea cable is cut) it could fragment. This can be avoided if the core of the nodes mostly has each other on the UNL. But since we cant and most importantly should not enforce that its encourages to create and publish an UNL if you think the existing UNLs are not good. Its also encourages to use an UNL with large overlap to other UNLs This leads to the assumption that almost everyone uses one of the published UNLs with minor changes (mostly additions) else if you had mayor changes you would publish an UNL to convince other to also drop/add specific nodes (after all if you have a reason you probably want to tell everyone) Since the UNLs overlap the real nodes UNLs should too and forking is not possible with large overlap. On a high overlap it could only halt if too many nodes are separated/offline which is the wanted behavior rather than making uncertain progress. There is a amendment coming (most likely) for negative UNL where nodes can signal that they lost contact to a node and temporary remove it form the UNL. This would reduce the risk of halting if large percentage of nodes are temporary lost. Instead of 20% it would tolerate more nodes to go offline before the network would halt. It basically adjust the 80% quorum requirement down with every node that goes offline but has a minimum of 60% of the original 100%. 60% is the minimum to prevent forking/fragmenting again. only 51% would be needed if the UNLs would had perfect 100% overlap, so its a bit higher to compensate for the fact that UNLs dont have 100% overlap. https://xrpl.org/negative-unl.html https://xrpl.org/negative-unl.html