From nobody Sun Feb 3 13:55:50 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CF5F128B01 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:55:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.232 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.232 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BOUND_DIGITS_15=0.798, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=farmorcloud-asia.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kHVoTGqfoiCo for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:55:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe42.google.com (mail-vs1-xe42.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 027791288BD for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:55:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe42.google.com with SMTP id y27so7466375vsi.1 for ; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 13:55:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=farmorcloud-asia.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zZrpX138hFtleDtYlCpGjJJJvlvOQi76lSuBdUodM50=; b=iEc7KEI5+EqwT0REZfb6KdWKDB0ANaeWD3VvVE3X4eGr0nynGm1h2gE9N6ktWZChAs wqXJiUGbpS+UoN5KjGs4TFjU8EpI1LPP4pezFq9ndpoO4/lm4yC9OjBjUA5u/WwBmzZv sGWAXbtGPnyPvFm7X8ca+6N2TYUnd7IQuswaZMhZxz18g+HOjPG74hxTLCUXbS4kYZWD UPoTFMg1DlbhTaPg0otk06+tnJJ8ZtgYu7VF6FmzQ1FaznhrEvVQZpbxy8UlyKPgTHh2 tHlH4NTNbz/9ZswuqO34lh9Kf32gxWPFXKLxDP1ethxXI915DYUDN0tNtJFPMoS33lnA L9Eg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zZrpX138hFtleDtYlCpGjJJJvlvOQi76lSuBdUodM50=; b=a2qvoZu0QVQXnOk/u/iylcFmMNl4dC6zWnwoBwEiITujDR+x3t8GEbBe9XbdTxgKnD rPmy5x6lMo/bL7yEq1/YrsxxjoZLiJb6dPTUGce37gfFhNH0XQD/iZFqza0qbCrpI4Du Igqh2qODDmKkDCQZ/NfZQeD0Xf/fIhrUydHNeM+37gyLK6GogwSPMkrYP5/65hP3Fueo uCUvmhzqVHPrtgbWblA6amn5UCD2xJh6fEWXXZ/Fbczoy6BzBgw1tUPPNQSHW38vip3d ItsdRILLQ7C5AQTKlMsz/tWTTLXVsbuxXJc6UVuUCzW/6QMQS1IGiV3b/v/XAzB76+rw kpUg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdv/BbYerfDiozQbp9nUB5XHLLtGYmObw69SBOFVQ4PweQGscDR FkEsUqHuFjzysqC+zZ01UePbgGfTaFLxRmEE51hFUQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN4QyGfGWtHHrTS40vf+T5CmGNSBRgt2bnPWybCnIDdmItfKK1mhzZThfCo2r3qAnj/IViqMQzMLw3j8Ymnurw8= X-Received: by 2002:a67:3509:: with SMTP id c9mr21446625vsa.33.1549230944808; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 13:55:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1549230784208.928342470@boxbe> In-Reply-To: <1549230784208.928342470@boxbe> From: Per Lind Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 22:55:34 +0100 Message-ID: To: AKASH KHOSLA Cc: Interledger Community Group , Interledger Mailing List - IETF , hyperledger-quilt@lists.hyperledger.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002404350581047021" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] Reading the old design papers of the internet X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 21:55:49 -0000 --0000000000002404350581047021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Akash, I agree wholeheartedly. Best, Per Lind Co-founder Toridion Quantum Computing Lab On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, 22:52 AKASH KHOSLA, wrote: > [image: Boxbe] AKASH KHOSLA ( > akhosla@berkeley.edu) is on your Guest List > > | Delete this guest > > Hello all, I was talking to Evan about this, and we think it would be a > good idea to read up on some of the old designs that led to the modern > internet by reading the seminal works and highly cited papers. > > There's a couple I've read recently as part of a graduate networking > course at UC Berkeley. These ones would be of interest to any person > designing protocols or systems over internet infrastructure, which I > believe is most of the ILP devs. > > > *The Design Philosophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols* > > https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//darpa-interne= t.pdf > > > What's really fascinating about this one is that Clark acknowledges the > internet would have been very different even if some of the second level > goals been shifted around. > > The fundamental goal was interconnecting existing networks. Sounds > familiar :) > > The second goal was availability despite loss of networks or gateways. > This was after all funded by the department of defense. The next three > goals focus on flexibility in terms of communication services, networks, > and management of resources. The others include cost effectiveness, etc. > There's loads of wisdom here we can discuss in further detail, would be > curious to hear more about the initial designs when determining the vario= us > layers and how they would function. > > > *END-TO-END ARGUMENTS IN SYSTEM DESIGN* > > https://people.eecs..berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//saltzer-e2e.= pdf > > > I suggest reading this paper if you haven't before since it really set th= e > foundation for why the internet is the way it is today. There are later > papers in the course that I've read which summarize it well. > > *From "A Case for End System Multicast":* > "According to the end-to-end arguments, a functionality should be (i) > pushed to higher layers if possible; unless (ii) implementing it at the > lower layer can achieve large performance benefits that outweigh the cost > of additional complexity at the lower layer." > > This was in the case of routers, so depending how you look at your stack, > you can quite elegantly apply the argument for having dumb logic in the > lower layers too. ILP lower layers are very different than what the > internet had in the sense that it's all software based. And this goes for > pretty much every system today. The end to end argument is so pervasive > that we've gone into recursively putting things at the ends whenever > possible. > > This design choice is responsible for the quick development of the > internet because the endpoints were malleable compared to > routers/middleware and rapid deployment is much easier that way. > > I like to use the analogy of Lightning vs Interledger for a lesson in > complexity. Not just in terms of HTLCs: > https://cyber.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/htlcs_considered_harmful.p= df > > But also in terms of weak interoperability/decentralized exchange support= . > I think there's some fundamental issues with such that once it's finished > for Bitcoin with all the bells and whistles (Neutrino, watchtowers, etc.)= , > it is going to be a very stubborn protocol to deploy for more than just > Bitcoin. I do like that there's a lightning plugin in progress for ILP to > ensure interconnection between these network down the line.. ILP is going > to be a stubborn protocol to get rid of if it grows to be the connection > network for a lot of payments. > > If we think about the fundamental goals here, Lightning obviously had ver= y > different ones than Interledger. But if the fundamental goal of IP was > interconnect, then clearly Interledger is on to something here in terms o= f > future proofing. I'm curious to here what anyone thinks the fundamental > goals were for either platform and perhaps formalizing them to further > clarify the RFCs. > > > *Towards an Active Network Architecture* > https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//active.pdf > > This was a paper suggesting that it made sense to move more functionality > into the middleware, and have people pay for computation. Make routers no= t > just packet forwarders, but program executors and storage providers - > basically servers that sound infra-structurally similar to many of the > blockchain platforms we see.. Funnily enough, one of the biggest criticis= ms > with this paper is authentication and billing, if you could solve it, you > have feasibility. It's quite interesting to see a proposal this while > Codius exists. This paper also was the inspiration for Software Defined > Networking. > > They're all coming from a class here if you're interested in following > along, but I'll post what I think are valuable ones every now and then: > https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/syllabus.html > > Hope that we can start an interesting discussion here! > *Akash Khosla* > Fourth Year EECS > akhosla@berkeley.edu > --0000000000002404350581047021 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Akash,

I = agree wholeheartedly.=C2=A0

Best,=C2=A0

Per Lind= =C2=A0
Co-founder=C2=A0
Torid= ion Quantum Computing Lab=C2=A0


=
On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, 22:52 AKASH= KHOSLA, <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
3D""
Hello all, I was talking to Evan about= this, and we think it would be a good idea to read up on some of the old d= esigns that led to the modern internet by reading the seminal works and hig= hly cited papers.

There's a couple I've re= ad recently as part of a graduate networking course at UC Berkeley. These o= nes would be of interest to any person designing protocols or systems over = internet infrastructure, which I believe is most of the ILP devs.

The Design Philosophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols
=
https://people.ee= cs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//darpa-internet.pdf=C2=A0

What's really fascinating about this one is that = Clark acknowledges the internet would have been very different even if some= of the second level goals been shifted around.

Th= e fundamental goal was interconnecting existing networks. Sounds familiar := )

The second goal was availability despite loss of= networks or gateways. This was after all funded by the department of defen= se. The next three goals focus on flexibility in terms of communication ser= vices, networks, and management of resources. The others include cost effec= tiveness, etc. There's loads of wisdom here we can discuss in further d= etail, would be curious to hear more about the initial designs when determi= ning the various layers and how they would function.

END-TO-END ARGUMENTS IN SYSTEM DESIGN

I sugge= st reading this paper if you haven't before since it really set the fou= ndation for why the internet is the way it is today. There are later papers= in the course that I've read which summarize it well.=C2=A0
=
From "A Case= for End System Multicast":
"According to the end-to-end arguments, a functionality should be (i) pushed to higher layers if possible; unless (ii) implementing it at the lower layer can achieve large performance benefits that=C2=A0outweigh the cost of additional complexity at the lower layer."

This was in the case= of routers, so depending how you look at your stack, you can quite elegant= ly apply the argument for having dumb logic in the lower layers too.=C2=A0<= span style=3D"font-family:-apple-system,system-ui,"segoe ui",robo= to,oxygen,ubuntu,cantarell,"fira sans","droid sans",&qu= ot;helvetica neue",sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-va= riant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-s= pacing:normal">ILP lower layers are very different than what the internet h= ad in the sense that it's all software based. And this goes for pretty = much every system today. The end to end argument is so pervasive that we= 9;ve gone into recursively putting things at the ends whenever possible.=C2= =A0

This design choice is responsible for t= he quick development of the internet because the endpoints were malleable c= ompared to routers/middleware and rapid deployment is much easier that way.=

I like to use the analogy of Lightning vs Interle= dger for a lesson in complexity. Not just in terms of HTLCs:=C2=A0https://cyber.stanford.edu/sites= /default/files/htlcs_considered_harmful.pdf

Bu= t also in terms of weak interoperability/decentralized exchange support. I = think there's some fundamental issues with such that once it's fini= shed for Bitcoin with all the bells and whistles (Neutrino, watchtowers, et= c.), it is going to be a very stubborn protocol to deploy for more than jus= t Bitcoin. I do like that there's a lightning plugin in progress for IL= P to ensure interconnection between these network down the line.. ILP is go= ing to be a stubborn protocol to get rid of if it grows to be the connectio= n network for a lot of payments.

If we think about= the fundamental goals here, Lightning obviously had very different ones th= an Interledger. But if the fundamental goal of IP was interconnect, then cl= early Interledger is on to something here in terms of future proofing. I= 9;m curious to here what anyone thinks the fundamental goals were for eithe= r platform and perhaps formalizing them to further clarify the RFCs.=C2=A0<= /div>

Towards an Active Network Architecture
<= /div>

This was a paper suggesting that it made sense to move more functi= onality into the middleware, and have people pay for computation. Make rout= ers not just packet forwarders, but program executors and storage providers= - basically servers that sound infra-structurally similar to many of the b= lockchain platforms we see.. Funnily enough, one of the biggest criticisms = with this paper is authentication and billing, if you could solve it, you h= ave feasibility. It's quite interesting to see a proposal this while Co= dius exists. This paper also was the inspiration for Software Defined Netwo= rking.=C2=A0

They're all coming from a class h= ere if you're interested in following along, but I'll post what I t= hink are valuable ones every now and then:=C2=A0
https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/syll= abus.html

<= div>Hope that we can start an intere= sting discussion here!
3D""=
Akash Khosla
Fourth Year EECS=
--0000000000002404350581047021-- From nobody Mon Feb 4 09:30:32 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5158712426A for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:30:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.219 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.219 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ripple.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lgjDa0eYW57O for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:30:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it1-x134.google.com (mail-it1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD52F130E86 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:30:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x134.google.com with SMTP id g85so1670310ita.3 for ; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 09:30:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ripple.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=a/3PY62mX8xbdpvNCMPtoPGeW+25QROEEPPsHXNE4+M=; b=ZcuFnLrr1vH73QFuu/6ZuuKfN7mtHxrfi4lV9dSoSJ3w/UV8lsA9Y4rhn/Vo1dPJ88 GkE1WPBTdbZl+IjUwpUEM7hGgtsY5lF8jiUOgjtppkN5+st1gqwTAch8evH47tT0B9ii +v/SJmpFutnESNjhhhbN/Njmi3/PCXEVpsDIo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=a/3PY62mX8xbdpvNCMPtoPGeW+25QROEEPPsHXNE4+M=; b=L1G9CJYVK913gLnwd7fmQL05VKaMKHBlwQZGDxUHknMhfzExs8r8O7LDevba8nF+0W LfNFoMQ57fAi52jtXLDHPTyP4phTFZPPsgKEdYYJS5FcjSyQzMGL4Ukvz5lYqDAO/umV kGJxWJCAsNS8EaN28gIgUUa2YQSJpeNYT8bDZ3nzP7+ZRI6+T3QY56mjVWGDC8aVmqHu I5Mf9tJXR9raHG0oYG8EwznAPLwn+mQ7vUNiPVX68bvvt/DSyGFu14a6xgBHSKNFEZGf 4N9jXNSxXJ7IH1Thrw5Cnj2WBlMrlBksoQi1QJq3cyeSpk0akiRpDl9/mkubq3Uicva6 6NwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYKqkuiJXH9VCYjRxABzVbZmImopEinNmupo2M8GA+o4LEil90W LUBN5PMev3ir8pLj4IwwliEfQiV0HxHDjzG8cwMrqg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYiC9GCCPAy+AFuaCmRLG0lE1tpfH6pGr9fb6e9DNhNM4v/rblPgeg7M1C5KsV6JvFpvNDIdLWlPMd2L4DXvIY= X-Received: by 2002:a02:15:: with SMTP id 21mr346549jaa.52.1549301426657; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 09:30:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5c564ea61729493b74000001@polymail.io> <6BDF9F10-AC5F-41C1-AEED-01DA8BA60C03@jabjabgroup.com> <83B5D059-0BF6-4DE6-A4DD-266BA0FD6B1B@secureblockchains.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Fuelling Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:30:15 -0700 Message-ID: To: Akash Khosla Cc: Bhaves Shah , Daniel Carroll , Yuriy Dybskiy , ledger@ietf.org, public-interledger@w3.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002fbadf058114d98f" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 17:30:30 -0000 --0000000000002fbadf058114d98f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice). Agree we need to move off of Gitter. On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla wrote: > Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid > confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which > regularly uses Gitter. > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald < > sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here >> >> I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the projects >> at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. >> >> Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat. >> >> Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A Linux >> foundation ID. Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux foundation >> and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. >> >> As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has to >> work within the larger community of Hyperledger. We have a unified >> standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more on the >> wiki.hyperledger.org >> >> Thank you, >> Silona >> >> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll < >> daniel.carroll@secureblockchains.com wrote: >> >>> It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms. >>> >>> I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing of >>> information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown information into >>> categories and maintain a logical history. >>> >>> I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team >>> attempting productivity. >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah >>> wrote: >>> >>> I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution that >>> is seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the community >>> grows, although cost could be an issue later.. >>> >>> You may want to check - https://flock.com/ >>> >>> Cheers! >>> Bhaves >>> >>> On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy wrote: >>> >>> Akash, really great proposal! >>> I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on >>> that one. >>> Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of it so >>> I'm +1 on that option as well :) >>> >>> Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight >>> preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option. >>> Curious what others think. >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter to >>>> another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could >>>> be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage >>>> dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the >>>> Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic >>>> interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil >>>> resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the >>>> lists. I think scaling the community requires something better than email >>>> and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. >>>> >>>> Couple problems with Gitter: >>>> >>>> 1. Clunky interface >>>> 2. Poor separation of conversations/rooms >>>> 3. Bad search function >>>> 4. Bad mobile app >>>> >>>> >>>> Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev >>>> communities: >>>> >>>> *Rocket.chat * >>>> Pros: >>>> >>>> 1. Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) >>>> 2. Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy >>>> with scripts >>>> 3. Slack-like interface >>>> 4. Good search functionality >>>> 5. Threads >>>> >>>> are being implemented >>>> 6. Usable mobile applications >>>> 7. Actively maintained + marketplace integrations >>>> 8. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would be happy to help). >>>> 9. Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. >>>> >>>> Cons: >>>> >>>> 1. Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can >>>> tell, but I expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain >>>> even more support than it already has. >>>> >>>> >>>> *Discord* >>>> Pros: >>>> >>>> 1. Commonly used >>>> 2. Free to use unlike sack >>>> 3. Fast and friendly >>>> 4. Solid mobile apps >>>> 5. Actively maintained >>>> 6. No self hosting or maintenance >>>> 7. Supports integrations >>>> >>>> Cons: >>>> >>>> 1. May not be free forever >>>> 2. Chat logs are owned by Discord >>>> 3. More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I >>>> describe it as heavier >>>> >>>> >>>> This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please chime >>>> in if you have a personal preference or have something to say about these >>>> platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives, you can >>>> generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what you like >>>> best. >>>> >>>> *Akash Khosla* >>>> Fourth Year EECS >>>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Yuriy @html5cat Dybskiy >>> >>> e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com >>> phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 >>> >>> Dybskiy.com / Twitter >>> / GitHub / Linkedin >>> >>> >>> _._,_._,_ >>> ------------------------------ >>> Links: >>> >>> You receive all messages sent to this group. >>> >>> View/Reply Online (#85) >>> | Reply To Sender >>> >>> | Reply To Group >>> >>> | Mute This Topic | New >>> Topic >>> >>> Your Subscription >>> | Contact Group >>> Owner | Unsubscribe >>> [ >>> sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org] >>> _._,_._,_ >>> >>> --0000000000002fbadf058114d98f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support=C2=A0<= div>https://www.discourse.org (0x= forum and chat use that and it seems nice).

Agree we need to move off of Gitter.
=

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at= 3:49 AM Akash Khosla <akhosla@b= erkeley.edu> wrote:
Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to = avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which re= gularly uses Gitter.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald <sbonewald@li= nuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Hello,

Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here=C2= =A0

I'm afraid this = is something we cannot change easily. All of the projects at Hyperledger ne= ed to be on the same chat system.=C2=A0

H= ttp://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat.=C2=A0

Please follow Ry"s directions earli= er about creating an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID.=C2=A0 Hyperledger also i= s a project under the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those = standards as well.

As a = community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has to work wit= hin the larger community of Hyperledger.=C2=A0 We have a unified standard. = You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org=C2= =A0

Thank you,
Silona

On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll <daniel.carroll@securebloc= kchains.com wrote:
It would l= ikely be good to have a couple of different platforms.=C2=A0

I like Discord and Telegram for communi= ty chat and general sharing of information. But both are limited in how you= can breakdown information into categories and maintain a logical history.= =C2=A0

I like Slack and Tr= ello for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity.=C2= =A0

Dan

On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah@ja= bjabgroup.com> wrote:

I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution that is= seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the community gr= ows, although cost could be an issue later..

You may wan= t to check - =C2=A0https://flock.com/

Cheers!
Bhaves

On 4 Feb 2019, at = 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy <yuriy@dybskiy.com> wrote:

=
Akash, really great proposal!
I've been using Discord more and more la= tely so I'm definitely=C2=A0+1 on that one.=C2=A0
Rocket.chat is built with= Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of it so I'm=C2=A0+1 on that option= as well :)

Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight = preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option.
Curious w= hat others think.

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AK= ASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
3D""
Hi all,

I was wondering if there would be a= ny interest in moving from Gitter to another platform. The main reason I br= ing this up is because Gitter could be out of the way for a lot of us and t= he application doesn't encourage dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit= old school and signing up for the Interledger one is out of the way. I thi= nk the reason for such a cryptic interface for the w3c style/linux foundati= on emails list is sybil resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal wr= ite permissions to the lists. I think scaling the community requires someth= ing better than email and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this.<= br>

Couple problems with Gitter:
  1. Clunky interface
  2. Poor separation of conversations/rooms
    3. Bad search function
  3. Bad mobile app

=
Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev= communities:

Pros:
  1. Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement)=
  2. Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with= scripts
  3. Slack-like interface
  4. Good search functionality
  5. Threads are bein= g implemented
  6. Usable mobile applications
  7. Actively maintaine= d + marketplace integrations
  8. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would be happy to help).
  9. Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gi= tter.



--
_._,_._,_
Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#85) | Reply To Sender =20 | Reply To Group =20 | =20 Mute This Topic =20 | New Topic

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org]

_._,_._,_

--0000000000002fbadf058114d98f-- From nobody Mon Feb 4 11:15:31 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E68E130EE6 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 11:15:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopebailie.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hb7VZJxmDOtm for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 11:15:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-x331.google.com (mail-ot1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 844BB1200D7 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 11:15:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-x331.google.com with SMTP id v23so1658359otk.9 for ; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 11:15:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopebailie.com; s=google; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=qTUTgBDqvUQyiUSz/9Y1ZL91eDBeptpW+hAcIEPDBf0=; b=FB1+3laAgDl6BGoVpwNomRUSeezXZ+AtxqDWMiFLV2SFf9JcKe/bHnCRdYSPIij/gg Y3y9TL3r6MyQ2ztIM1dnFSudGY961azK53C7v+/Pl59BIj9znJ2/fl5/yIV1yQE20lml 3gwuWvG+l+nhMJq4/KC6JmGBtVMH0t1hz14Ag= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=qTUTgBDqvUQyiUSz/9Y1ZL91eDBeptpW+hAcIEPDBf0=; b=YVcq4beuxsnAr93UDMwRc3iwb71k0Jz8q9o4aIMYvZh43oGKr+rwqAyz71tJd1bgGf tCpz0lrPAw0Ns+N59N/+eXiyAo8DgOXSuvJsbORvS6yJJONMeH/5PfGWEgnzunAxPD+n vZYD2mZuFWpPZ0KUZrwHg9S4rdS1GNCAQXh1v6gREZ4xOXa4M0ouNnZpMVGU4/E0DpjV I+2dgMDhRLQF5b8s32I9N976dUxqfmTRQ335+SnIvSPhkhSvxXfDcXHyPeTTw6ahq0xp /NVplFrjZ8zH28LIo3WgJQSc57twTw/dB+AVlLWJRhYsb/jpMS197hMRptgiTYndvHD4 SBQw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAubrfHzjvXyLYrtTvufbRktdB7GIAQwjuXwTEATXkNE3e7yfWXIf HLslWXUCk099fgEgzGJiqX0IWHcjqT3zWWxzCHZIbQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZYSTHQ/uim2OzMLlacTXY+L2Jma0+mtdwjPlfMPHdiHkuEoqsOUJt4laZVv6/eNZJyXGTJfkh/cT1KIWb1EK0= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7cd9:: with SMTP id r25mr507247otn.110.1549307725559; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 11:15:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Adrian Hope-Bailie Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 21:15:13 +0200 Message-ID: To: Interledger Community Group , Interledger Mailing List - IETF , Hyperledger Quilt Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="000000000000a1807105811650c9" Archived-At: Subject: [Ledger] AGENDA - - Interledger Call - 6 February - 3pm UTC X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 19:15:30 -0000 --000000000000a1807105811650c9 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a1806f05811650c7" --000000000000a1806f05811650c7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, Two topics for this week including: - A presentation from Steven Zeiler and Anypay on what they're doing with ILP. - A discussion about Interledger and Decentralised Exchanges from a conversation that started on Gitter. If anyone is up for leading this topic please let me know or just reply to this mail. Note that all the recent calls are available to listen to from the website: https://interledger.org/calls.html Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/s/377506344 Or iPhone one-tap: US: +14086380968,,377506344# or +16468769923,,377506344# Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 408 638 0968 <+1%20408%20638%200968> or +1 646 876 9923 <+1%20646%20876%209923> or +1 669 900 6833 <+1%20669%20900%206833> Meeting ID: 377 506 344 International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/cbrUAzE3W --000000000000a1806f05811650c7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

Two topics for= this week including:

=C2=A0- A presentation from = Steven Zeiler and Anypay on what they're doing with ILP.
=C2=A0- A = discussion about Interledger and Decentralised Exchanges from a conversatio= n that started on Gitter. If anyone is up for leading this topic please let= me know or just reply to this mail.

Note that all= the recent calls are available to listen to from the website:
https://interledger.org/calls.= html

Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS o= r Android:=C2=A0https://zoo= m.us/s/377506344

Or iPhone one-tap:
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0US: +14086380968,,37= 7506344# or +16468769923,,377506344#

Or Telephone:
=
<= font style=3D"font-family:sans-serif">=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Dial(for high= er quality, dial a number based on your current location):=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0US:=C2=A0+1 408 638 0968=C2=A0or=C2=A0<= font style=3D"font-family:sans-serif">+1 646 876 9923=C2=A0or=C2=A0+1 669 900 6833<= /a>=C2=A0
--000000000000a1806f05811650c7-- --000000000000a1807105811650c9 Content-Type: text/calendar; charset="US-ASCII"; name="ilp-2019-02-06.ics" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ilp-2019-02-06.ics" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: X-Attachment-Id: f_jrqproie0 QkVHSU46VkNBTEVOREFSDQpWRVJTSU9OOjIuMA0KQ0FMU0NBTEU6R1JFR09SSUFODQpCRUdJTjpW RVZFTlQNCkRUU1RBTVA6MjAxOTAyMDZUMDAwNDU0Wg0KVUlEOjIwMTkwMjA2QGludGVybGVkZ2Vy Lm9yZw0KRFRTVEFSVDoyMDE5MDIwNlQxNTAwMDBaDQpEVEVORDoyMDE5MDIwNlQxNjAwMDBaDQpT VU1NQVJZOkludGVybGVkZ2VyIENvbW11bml0eSBDYWxsDQpVUkw6aHR0cHMlM0ElMkYlMkZ6b29t LnVzJTJGcyUyRjM3NzUwNjM0NA0KREVTQ1JJUFRJT046Sm9pbiBmcm9tIFBDXCwgTWFjXCwgTGlu dXhcLCBpT1Mgb3IgQW5kcm9pZDogaHR0cHM6Ly96b29tLnVzL3MvMzc3NTA2MzQ0XG5cbk9yIGlQ aG9uZSBvbmUtdGFwOlxuICAgIFVTOiArMTQwODYzODA5NjhcLFwsMzc3NTA2MzQ0IyBvciArMTY0 Njg3Njk5MjNcLFwsMzc3NTA2MzQ0I1xuXG5PciBUZWxlcGhvbmU6XG4gICAgRGlhbChmb3IgaGln aGVyIHF1YWxpdHlcLCBkaWFsIGEgbnVtYmVyIGJhc2VkIG9uIHlvdXIgY3VycmVudCBsb2NhdGlv bik6IFxuICAgIFVTOiArMSA0MDggNjM4IDA5Njggb3IgKzEgNjQ2IDg3NiA5OTIzIG9yICsxIDY2 OSA5MDAgNjgzMyBcbiAgICBNZWV0aW5nIElEOiAzNzcgNTA2IDM0NFxuICAgIEludGVybmF0aW9u YWwgbnVtYmVycyBhdmFpbGFibGU6IGh0dHBzOi8vem9vbS51cy91L2NiclVBekUzV1xuDQpFTkQ6 VkVWRU5UDQpFTkQ6VkNBTEVOREFS --000000000000a1807105811650c9-- From daniel.carroll@secureblockchains.com Sun Feb 3 21:23:38 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CFB130E09 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 21:23:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=secureblockchains.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w_yEE7eqkZlW for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 21:23:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt1-x82f.google.com (mail-qt1-x82f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B2A21294FA for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 21:23:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x82f.google.com with SMTP id u47so14184140qtj.6 for ; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 21:23:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=secureblockchains.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=2ZsORy/t2baoQv35lLUDVl7icrTAdlPsVN7CmJzjSJw=; b=n5uQUGy+5e3lugOTxy7VUslt+Ka+kgTXTYQbJJjuYMeqNwv1hFnO+VTezHgcdSXKOD eRjVp+/lnHzYCq6QFpTLp11GaKepcqya4P5CvRGpbTC9UyfjoWDtQtt22HSdlgNPAxbl WYL3FzQseA1Kb5tI/rLnUum/g+Fcqr3ZJN9AXU9ksd3fNyOUwmWYGfMBit8I5a2xi4uE NTMoeECj+zhyfbld6cELymXmg5ZRIsWHI1SiTVpR/gnfTHOdezxc8GF8HYOIxLF1Nb2K Q6f6iHtOQ6KfOJqIG1+SbiqFBQmAsR+a28gEg6zPaYZ7t4Sg/Ih5KQwNRDI2ykkSKhVt FhKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=2ZsORy/t2baoQv35lLUDVl7icrTAdlPsVN7CmJzjSJw=; b=nXQqnvPcrvNl2m7kuOgcqYg2orMj0oYj2lNMcvPwGjeH5egSB8N7wapIkfwSAAEZm4 I1R+X5GcI7L4aU9V5nHoAF9+VIf420OWfUPPoT2m9XqSO4MpXkBUDiYZcpe2oPCX1QiS u43oernVuOj8W8MRMMDPOJY+o4xyoCp1XiVZ4ejSQBjPAVMV/pL1MMtrozah7bAZRNrs 6o0Zh/89ITg9DUWUofu8MCOwPZd5r9aWmioKZCr+rRmfMDSNNMhd0PFvv4Zfrn1DiF9n McVcfqOWrBk3EDA3q9seZhVIR1ey0poJgTzud+RFAzk2yzXrvzKDyqBCSi/hDT+3dEWJ Y9JA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAua+oWsR5u8kD2e/cMWrOCpoqpVjrH992scU5lxJnG/js1wKbNtQ AW4WpzXnOX/G+P/tlL9P3159Zg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYfY+9oPUzjo4s3xwASB2lrrb4jSdA0SfmuqYphTCLBzh8yt1WiznlgFWK3eA8KGLBJxZkB5w== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7141:: with SMTP id h1mr422872qtp.78.1549257815370; Sun, 03 Feb 2019 21:23:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.207] (cpe-184-153-202-98.twcny.res.rr.com. [184.153.202.98]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r1sm14244852qte.28.2019.02.03.21.23.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 03 Feb 2019 21:23:34 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-606EA6E8-B202-48AF-B028-247120D97602 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Daniel Carroll X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16C101) In-Reply-To: <6BDF9F10-AC5F-41C1-AEED-01DA8BA60C03@jabjabgroup.com> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 00:23:33 -0500 Cc: Yuriy Dybskiy , AKASH KHOSLA , hyperledger-quilt@lists.hyperledger.org, ledger@ietf.org, public-interledger@w3.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <83B5D059-0BF6-4DE6-A4DD-266BA0FD6B1B@secureblockchains.com> References: <5c564ea61729493b74000001@polymail.io> <6BDF9F10-AC5F-41C1-AEED-01DA8BA60C03@jabjabgroup.com> To: Bhaves Shah Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 12:11:29 -0800 Subject: Re: [Ledger] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 05:35:30 -0000 --Apple-Mail-606EA6E8-B202-48AF-B028-247120D97602 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms.=20 I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing of inform= ation. But both are limited in how you can breakdown information into catego= ries and maintain a logical history.=20 I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting= productivity.=20 Dan > On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah wrot= e: >=20 > I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution that is= seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the community gro= ws, although cost could be an issue later.. >=20 > You may want to check - https://flock.com/ >=20 > Cheers! > Bhaves >=20 >> On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy wrote: >>=20 >> Akash, really great proposal! >> I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that= one.=20 >> Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of it so I'm= +1 on that option as well :) >>=20 >> Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight prefere= nce there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option. >> Curious what others think. >>=20 >>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA wrote= : >>>=20 >>> Hi all, >>>=20 >>> I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter to a= nother platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could be o= ut of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage dedicate= d usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the Interledger= one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic interface for t= he w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil resistance and anti-spam s= ince there are liberal write permissions to the lists. I think scaling the c= ommunity requires something better than email and Gitter. Would be great to h= ear thoughts on this. >>>=20 >>> Couple problems with Gitter: >>> Clunky interface >>> Poor separation of conversations/rooms >>> Bad search function >>> Bad mobile app >>>=20 >>> Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev c= ommunities: >>>=20 >>> Rocket.chat >>> Pros: >>> Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) >>> Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with scrip= ts >>> Slack-like interface >>> Good search functionality >>> Threads are being implemented >>> Usable mobile applications >>> Actively maintained + marketplace integrations >>> Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would be happy to help). >>> Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. >>> Cons: >>> Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tell, but I= expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain even more sup= port than it already has. >>>=20 >>> Discord >>> Pros: >>> Commonly used >>> Free to use unlike sack >>> Fast and friendly >>> Solid mobile apps >>> Actively maintained >>> No self hosting or maintenance >>> Supports integrations >>> Cons: >>> May not be free forever >>> Chat logs are owned by Discord >>> More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I describe= it as heavier >>>=20 >>> This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please chime i= n if you have a personal preference or have something to say about these pla= tforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives, you can gener= ally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what you like best. >>>=20 >>> =09 >>> Akash Khosla >>> Fourth Year EECS >>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>=20 >>=20 >> --=20 >> Best regards, >> Yuriy @html5cat Dybskiy >>=20 >> e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com >> phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 >>=20 >> Dybskiy.com / Twitter / GitHub / Linkedin --Apple-Mail-606EA6E8-B202-48AF-B028-247120D97602 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It w= ould likely be good to have a couple of different platforms. 

I like Discord and Telegram for comm= unity chat and general sharing of information. But both are limited in how y= ou can breakdown information into categories and maintain a logical history.=  

I like Slack and Tre= llo for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity. =

Dan
=
On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.com> wrote:

<= blockquote type=3D"cite">
I assume when looking at the community= at large we want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has the feat= ure set to grow as the community grows, although cost could be an issue late= r..

You may want to check -  https://flock.com/

Cheers!
Bhaves

On 4 Feb 2019, at 10= :36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy <yuriy@dybskiy= .com> wrote:

=
Akash, really great proposal!
I've been usi= ng Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that one. =
Rock= et.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of it so I'm += 1 on that option as well :)

Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polish= ed so slight preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better o= ption.
On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7= :02 PM AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berk= eley.edu> wrote:
Hi al= l,

I was wondering if there would be any interest i= n moving from Gitter to another platform. The main reason I bring this up is= because Gitter could be out of the way for a lot of us and the application d= oesn't encourage dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signi= ng up for the Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such= a cryptic interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil= resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the l= ists. I think scaling the community requires something better than email and= Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this.

Couple problems with Gitter:
  1. Clunky interface
    2. Poor separation of conversations/rooms
  2. Bad search function
    3. Bad mobile app

Some alternatives I think= users enjoy using, and are well known in dev communities:

  1. Open source chat (basically a fri= endly IRC replacement)
  2. Self hosting is free, cloud options available= , easy to deploy with scripts
  3. Slack-like interface
  4. Good sear= ch functionality
  5. Threads are being= implemented
  6. Usable mobile applications
  7. Actively maintained += marketplace integrations
  8. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would be happy to he= lp).
  9. Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter.
Cons:=
  1. Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter fr= om what I can tell, but I expect it to continue to grow in usage down the li= ne and gain even more support than it already has.
Discord
Pros:
  1. Commonl= y used
  2. Free to use unlike sack
  3. Fast and friendly
  4. Sol= id mobile apps
  5. Actively maintained
  6. No self hosting or mainte= nance
  7. Supports integrations
Cons:
  1. May not be free forever
  2. Chat logs are owned by Discord
    3. More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I describe it= as heavier

This list may not be complete= in terms of pros and cons so please chime in if you have a personal prefere= nce or have something to say about these platforms or others. I've spent som= e time with both alternatives, you can generally find demos on their corresp= onding websites to see what you like best.

<= tbody>
3D""
Akash Khosla
Fourth= Year EECS

=

--
Best regards,
Yuriy @html5cat Dybskiy

e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com
phone: +1 (650) 434-2004
<= /div>
= --Apple-Mail-606EA6E8-B202-48AF-B028-247120D97602-- From nobody Mon Feb 4 17:03:05 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3EB8130E00 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 17:03:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.217 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.217 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AC_DIV_BONANZA=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ripple.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oZrKD2T9ucJA for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 17:03:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pg1-x541.google.com (mail-pg1-x541.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::541]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF54F130DD3 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 17:03:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg1-x541.google.com with SMTP id d72so695067pga.9 for ; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 17:03:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ripple.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version; bh=fMKFv8YUj1Lzphm5W12hxRdGm400PbOexO6u3VyRLVI=; b=Y/2kCrB+scjFotQrfA0nu0eIqVz+tkcJtzILsclv+XBtRyyZ5fphCpWnWL54Jdpl8J rc6/QoMnZcozsqdn0FyJIrw2DGqNW9m0fO1FEnOpZ0Ke5eKApNAMJHImqUvX6/LsvpQ4 nVMpWuw1/DOqibhvYuAai4CF2vG52DRUnInSQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version; bh=fMKFv8YUj1Lzphm5W12hxRdGm400PbOexO6u3VyRLVI=; b=IslJNQso9AolQFkKiqwe2eJ70Mk8uCBBG+S7HW0i50wfMmiWmhEhE9DXe3OqltOduk /ymH1KLhb7cxIUpQAuwc8og2Lmk1n1zivzZrueOGRjD8TSilSKt8dACc5t2s6BaJNfzA 2fQ/Moe4mzZV5G5VOulG19Fh5pqxAO887x3ztU6ca4bbP/8izmNg83dPj/yfnPx9XiT0 Vyr0xDFByt/zZ1zz5UP6Si7sr2+XxHfuC4j8qcjpURE3gjxD+ANuIPMMAxhNm/WKYYxL 3uMe3cPBu7ybmKQQ/6mba4GMS4GwvkO+x0QD2T+g5Sc7PZV7USBRztc24GN+nS//P/Xw KdmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYJQZ7hNy96u3uIJ0UmBBYc2N8VTTs2A1Ua+Cwibj51uY2CdAYI uba4g9eH3rI8D/c4b6s9BMcAQw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IaAjMpLia6rreFf+DdCMXFDnJvRBYc9eXpzpOsKE52hhLB8V0OFqk3oMZQJNjmQK6CExFXMTQ== X-Received: by 2002:a65:610f:: with SMTP id z15mr2006823pgu.153.1549328579595; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 17:02:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from arch ([4.78.252.19]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z62sm2100770pfi.4.2019.02.04.17.02.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Feb 2019 17:02:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 17:02:57 -0800 From: Evan Schwartz To: Brian Kerr Cc: David Fuelling , Bhaves Shah , Daniel Carroll , Yuriy Dybskiy , "=?utf-8?Q?ledger=40ietf.org?=" , "=?utf-8?Q?public-interledger=40w3.org?=" , Akash Khosla Message-ID: <1549326965.local-940fe1b0-72bb-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mailspring MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5c58e0c1_67b0a915_20c8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:03:04 -0000 --5c58e0c1_67b0a915_20c8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread. Sync Current: Gitter Use case: support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion Main problems: low response rate because a) there aren't enough contributors who are dedicating time to field issues (myself included) and b) few people have Gitter open all the time so checking for new messages is an extra step My take: Slack isn't great for open source projects but it is the one that most Interledger contributors have sitting open while they're working, so if we're optimizing for making sure people get help that might be the best one Async Current: Github Issues, Mailing List Use case: design discussion, brainstorming Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sending emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyone's inbox My take: Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of the Rust and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how different the participation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues and PRs. PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion! On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr wrote: > If we want to expand the community, I definitely would recommend switching to something that isn't forcing people to learn a new app. Adding the hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding and engagement. > > > I'd recommend slack or discord because most people already have the apps and are familiar with how to use them. > Brian Kerr > Co-founder > Kava.io > > > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling wrote: > > +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support > > https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice). > > > > Agree we need to move off of Gitter. > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla wrote: > > > Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which regularly uses Gitter. > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here > > > > > > > > I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the projects at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. > > > > > > > > Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat. > > > > > > > > Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID. Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. > > > > > > > > As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has to work within the larger community of Hyperledger. We have a unified standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org (http://wiki.hyperledger.org) > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > Silona > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll > > > > It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms. > > > > > > > > > > I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing of information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown information into categories and maintain a logical history. > > > > > > > > > > I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity. > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah wrote: > > > > > > I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the community grows, although cost could be an issue later.. > > > > > > > > > > > > You may want to check - https://flock.com/ > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > Bhaves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy wrote: > > > > > > > Akash, really great proposal! > > > > > > > I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that one. > > > > > > > Rocket.chat (http://rocket.chat/) is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of it so I'm +1 on that option as well :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat (http://rocket.chat/) is a better option. > > > > > > > Curious what others think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter to another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the lists. I think scaling the community requires something better than email and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple problems with Gitter: > > > > > > > > Clunky interface > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Poor separation of conversations/rooms > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad search function > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad mobile app > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev communities: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rocket.chat (https://rocket.chat/) > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > > > > Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with scripts > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Slack-like interface > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good search functionality > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Threads (https://github.com/RocketChat/Rocket.Chat/pull/11803#issuecomment-455963816) are being implemented > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Usable mobile applications > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actively maintained + marketplace integrations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (http://chat.interledger.org) (would be happy to help). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tell, but I expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain even more support than it already has. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discord > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > > > > Commonly used > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Free to use unlike sack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fast and friendly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Solid mobile apps > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actively maintained > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No self hosting or maintenance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Supports integrations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > May not be free forever > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chat logs are owned by Discord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I describe it as heavier > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please chime in if you have a personal preference or have something to say about these platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives, you can generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what you like best. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Akash Khosla > > > > > > > > Fourth Year EECS > > > > > > > > akhosla@berkeley.edu (mailto:akhosla@berkeley.edu) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yuriy @html5cat (http://twitter.com/html5cat) Dybskiy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com (mailto:yuriy@dybskiy.com) > > > > > > > phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dybskiy.com (http://dybskiy.com) / Twitter (http://twitter.com/html5cat) / GitHub (http://github.com/html5cat) / Linkedin (http://ca.linkedin..com/in/dybskiy) > > > > > _._,_._,_ > > > > > Links: > > > > > You receive all messages sent to this group. > > > > > > > > > > View/Reply Online (#85) (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/message/85) | Reply To Sender (mailto:?subject=Private:%20Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else) | Reply To Group (mailto:quilt@lists.hyperledger.org?subject=Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else) | Mute This Topic (https://lists.hyperledger.org/mt/29637867/1540173) | New Topic (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post) > > > > > Your Subscription (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/editsub/1540173) | Contact Group Owner (mailto:quilt+owner@lists.hyperledger.org) | Unsubscribe (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/unsub) [sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org (mailto:sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org)] > > > > > _._,_._,_ --5c58e0c1_67b0a915_20c8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and asy= nchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread.
Sync
  • Current: Gitter
  • Use case: support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion
    =
  • Main problems: = low response rate because a) there aren't enough contributors who are ded= icating time to field issues (myself included) and b) few people have Git= ter open all the time so checking for new messages is an extra step
    =
  • My take: Slack = isn't great for open source projects but it is the one that most Interled= ger contributors have sitting open while they're working, so if we're opt= imizing for making sure people get help that might be the best one
    <= /li>
Async
  • Current: Github Issues, Mailing List
  • Use case<= span data-emoji-typing=3D=22true=22>: design discussion, brainstor= ming
  • Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sending emails= to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyone's inbox<= /div>
  • My take: D= iscourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of the Rust a= nd Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how different the part= icipation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues and PRs.=
PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick of= f this discussion=21

On =46eb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr <brian=40kava.io> wrot= e:
If we want to expa= nd the community, I definitely would recommend switching to something tha= t isn't forcing people to learn a new app.  Adding the hurdle of tha= t will hurt on-boarding and engagement. 

<= div>
I'd recommend slack or discord because most people already have = the apps and are familiar with how to use them. 
Brian Kerr
Co-founder
Kava.io



=
On Mon, =46eb 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David =46uelling <fuelling=40ripple.com> wrote:
<= div>
+1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support 
https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use tha= t and it seems nice).

Agree we need to move off = of Gitter.

On Mon, =46eb 4, 2019= at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla <akhosla=40berkeley.edu&g= t; wrote:
Gotcha, in that case I'll move the = Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Inter= ledger working group which regularly uses Gitter.

On Mon, =46eb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald <sbonewald=40linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
Hello,

Silona the VP of c= ommunity architecture for Hyperledger here 

I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the project= s at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. 

=
Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket c= hat. 

Please follow Ry=22s directions earli= er about creating an L=46 ID. A Linux foundation ID.  Hyperledger al= so is a project under the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of = those standards as well.

As a community and espe= cially quilt bring an interopability tool has to work within the larger c= ommunity of Hyperledger.  We have a unified standard. You can read u= p on the Hyperledger project process more on the wiki.hyperl= edger.org 

Thank you,
Silona<= /div>

On Sun, =46eb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll= <daniel.carroll=40secu= reblockchains.com wrote:
It would li= kely be good to have a couple of different platforms. 
I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sh= aring of information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown infor= mation into categories and maintain a logical history. 
I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a= team attempting productivity. 

Dan

On =46eb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah=40jabjabgroup.com> wrote:

I assume when looking at the community= at large we want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has the f= eature set to grow as the community grows, although cost could be an issu= e later..

You may want to check -  https://= flock.com/

Cheers=21
Bhaves
<= div>
On 4 =46eb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy <yu= riy=40dybskiy.com> wrote:

Akash, re= ally great proposal=21
I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm d= efinitely +1 on that one. 
Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of i= t so I'm +1 on that option as well :)

Discord might be the eas= iest to setup and more polished so slight preference there, but long term= maybe Rocket.chat<= /font> is a better option.=
Curious = what others think.

On Sa= t, =46eb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla=40ber= keley.edu> wrote:
3D=22=22
Hi all,
I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving= from Gitter to another platform. The main reason I bring this up is beca= use Gitter could be out of the way for a lot of us and the application do= esn't encourage dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and sig= ning up for the Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for= such a cryptic interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list = is sybil resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissio= ns to the lists. I think scaling the community requires something better = than email and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this.

Couple problems with Gitter:
  1. Clunky interface
  • Poor separation of conversations/roo= ms
  • Bad search function
  • Bad mobile a= pp

    • Some alternatives I think use= rs enjoy using, and are well known in dev communities:

    Pros:
    1. =
      Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement)
      2. Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with= scripts
    2. Slack-like interface
    3. Good = search functionality
    4. Threads are being implemented
    5. Usable mobile= applications
    6. Actively maintained + marketplace integr= ations
    7. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org= (would be happy to help).
    8. Easy sign in with GitHu= b, just like gitter.
    Cons:
    1. Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tell, bu= t I expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain even mo= re support than it already has.

    = Discord
    Pros:
    1. Commonly = used
    2. =46ree to use unlike sack
    3. =46a= st and friendly
    4. Solid mobile apps
    5. A= ctively maintained
    6. No self hosting or maintenance
    7. Supports integrations
    Cons:
    1. May not be free forever
    2. Chat logs a= re owned by Discord
    3. More complex interface than Slack/= Rocket (some colleagues and I describe it as heavier
    =
    This list may not be complete in terms of pros and c= ons so please chime in if you have a personal preference or have somethin= g to say about these platforms or others. I've spent some time with both = alternatives, you can generally find demos on their corresponding website= s to see what you like best.

    3D=22=22
    Akash Khosla
    =46ourth Year EECS
    = akhosla=40berkeley.edu


    --
    <= div>
    Best regards,=
    Yuriy&nbs= p;=40h= tml5cat Dy= bskiy

    phone: +1 (650) 434-2004

    Dybskiy.com / Twitter / GitHub / Linkedin<= /font>
    <= /div>
    =
    <= div>=5F.=5F,=5F.=5F,=5F
    = Links:
    You receive all messages sent to this group.


    <= /div>
    =5F.=5F,=5F.=5F,=5F<= /div>
     --5c58e0c1_67b0a915_20c8-- From akhosla@berkeley.edu Mon Feb 4 02:48:19 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7D4130E57 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:48:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.02 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.02 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XhuM1HgMmVbS for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:48:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it1-x136.google.com (mail-it1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57A6A130E2E for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:48:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x136.google.com with SMTP id a6so19930985itl.4 for ; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 02:48:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:cc; bh=D5Ty1g1//24sYIrEungdGcDSlS4mSXf2oyjMcYG0zbI=; b=T8mhEwtxTWkTCyhXL1GRxirtix7NJ3QN1iAf73oJLXAEOg1leYFxbEnspyAwkVjo3R l2buzkqIxoACfmYwb8wSlL6T9B9Jxl8cvxE9KTROLt/uzh0VsJqAtSz1nf5gEXLHbfZT 9pDJG8mJPbHmRaiywNz9muabjDMblaMNpDwChiZWGxT9oG7yWXnA1h9sRk/aomVesAZL tj7Rb46SmVMK2ZI45Nq81kZvqx1DaOSd8BQZEIkdyhwwOLOw2FfwziOK52X6X6hrRDa/ DkhZNzTOcYyMRSkdp8R6iwyfmifU1DPhEh45v9M2TSO9WuSmKY8qbFdEi358fLsx3dIR pu7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:cc; bh=D5Ty1g1//24sYIrEungdGcDSlS4mSXf2oyjMcYG0zbI=; b=GRBKqzg+yl2oDf0YGt/A4u5FvfMdIoU8yeVA4aS/dz6149ZXdcU7MT48VUfB0TX6Ce 6JUSp6FNAfDmPoMp8nQU91phA2oPd8TRSkDSiR6C+VPrBIp34RzdlXXRkb5ay8C0X+wq xJtyM2SMUQ3mVcDCwdQ8RELDZSNXrl7SSQoFXY+rBZZsA6tdKn7TVMp9K+Oz01+j3Ucm xEKDCfHr5gHM0oYwja7i6Tzu999GtP880Z5KS4oEEvlNMFqFyXBRnUXrTyUzjEPrH5m0 3yAUg5yUcyw8ew4XqA9pWtyGL03uSNCYx9UGABGkLn65Nq6+o+6D1m7QKi5s2NOXz+4a loqQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYBBJ60e0HbAVjoVee1j6sngNrqQkvTcHPLcDQQWssmQ21fcqSU uvQ5z6wGJ76RH2t3V0suwDswXS48OOo1rR/JRwnF7Ihv3i6TLw== X-Received: by 2002:a5e:c744:: with SMTP id g4mt1004814iop.51.1549277295385; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 02:48:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5c564ea61729493b74000001@polymail.io> <6BDF9F10-AC5F-41C1-AEED-01DA8BA60C03@jabjabgroup.com> <83B5D059-0BF6-4DE6-A4DD-266BA0FD6B1B@secureblockchains.com> In-Reply-To: From: Akash Khosla Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:48:04 -0800 Message-ID: Cc: Daniel Carroll , Bhaves Shah , Yuriy Dybskiy , ledger@ietf.org, public-interledger@w3.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d9e20d05810f3adf" Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 07:29:39 -0800 Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 22:53:41 -0000 --000000000000d9e20d05810f3adf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which regularly uses Gitter. On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald < sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Hello, > > Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here > > I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the projects > at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. > > Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat. > > Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A Linux > foundation ID. Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux foundation > and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. > > As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has to > work within the larger community of Hyperledger. We have a unified > standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more on the > wiki.hyperledger.org > > Thank you, > Silona > > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll < > daniel.carroll@secureblockchains.com wrote: > >> It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms. >> >> I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing of >> information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown information into >> categories and maintain a logical history. >> >> I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team >> attempting productivity. >> >> Dan >> >> On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah >> wrote: >> >> I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution that >> is seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the community >> grows, although cost could be an issue later.. >> >> You may want to check - https://flock.com/ >> >> Cheers! >> Bhaves >> >> On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy wrote: >> >> Akash, really great proposal! >> I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that >> one. >> Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of it so >> I'm +1 on that option as well :) >> >> Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight >> preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option. >> Curious what others think. >> >> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter to >>> another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could >>> be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage >>> dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the >>> Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic >>> interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil >>> resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the >>> lists. I think scaling the community requires something better than email >>> and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. >>> >>> Couple problems with Gitter: >>> >>> 1. Clunky interface >>> 2. Poor separation of conversations/rooms >>> 3. Bad search function >>> 4. Bad mobile app >>> >>> >>> Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev >>> communities: >>> >>> *Rocket.chat * >>> Pros: >>> >>> 1. Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) >>> 2. Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy >>> with scripts >>> 3. Slack-like interface >>> 4. Good search functionality >>> 5. Threads >>> >>> are being implemented >>> 6. Usable mobile applications >>> 7. Actively maintained + marketplace integrations >>> 8. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would be happy to help). >>> 9. Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. >>> >>> Cons: >>> >>> 1. Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can >>> tell, but I expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain >>> even more support than it already has. >>> >>> >>> *Discord* >>> Pros: >>> >>> 1. Commonly used >>> 2. Free to use unlike sack >>> 3. Fast and friendly >>> 4. Solid mobile apps >>> 5. Actively maintained >>> 6. No self hosting or maintenance >>> 7. Supports integrations >>> >>> Cons: >>> >>> 1. May not be free forever >>> 2. Chat logs are owned by Discord >>> 3. More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I >>> describe it as heavier >>> >>> >>> This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please chime >>> in if you have a personal preference or have something to say about these >>> platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives, you can >>> generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what you like >>> best. >>> >>> *Akash Khosla* >>> Fourth Year EECS >>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Yuriy @html5cat Dybskiy >> >> e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com >> phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 >> >> Dybskiy.com / Twitter >> / GitHub / Linkedin >> >> >> _._,_._,_ >> ------------------------------ >> Links: >> >> You receive all messages sent to this group. >> >> View/Reply Online (#85) >> | Reply To Sender >> >> | Reply To Group >> >> | Mute This Topic | New >> Topic >> >> Your Subscription >> | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe >> [ >> sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org] >> _._,_._,_ >> >> --000000000000d9e20d05810f3adf Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to= bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group = which regularly uses Gitter.

    On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewal= d <sbonewald@linuxfound= ation.org> wrote:
    Hello,

    Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here=C2=A0

    I'm afraid this is som= ething we cannot change easily. All of the projects at Hyperledger need to = be on the same chat system.=C2=A0

    Http://= Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat.=C2=A0

    Please follow Ry"s directions earlier abo= ut creating an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID.=C2=A0 Hyperledger also is a pr= oject under the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those standa= rds as well.

    As a commun= ity and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has to work within th= e larger community of Hyperledger.=C2=A0 We have a unified standard. You ca= n read up on the Hyperledger project process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org=C2=A0

    Thank you,
    Silona

    On = Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll <daniel.carroll@secureblockchains.= com wrote:
    <= div dir=3D"auto">
    It would likely be= good to have a couple of different platforms.=C2=A0
    =
    I like Discord and Telegram for community chat a= nd general sharing of information. But both are limited in how you can brea= kdown information into categories and maintain a logical history.=C2=A0

    I like Slack and Trello for g= rouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity.=C2=A0

    Dan

    On = Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.c= om> wrote:

    I= assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution that is s= eccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the community grow= s, although cost could be an issue later..

    You may want = to check - =C2=A0https://flock.com/

    Cheers!
    Bhav= es

    On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybski= y <yuriy@dybskiy.com> wrote:

    Akash, really great p= roposal!
    I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm defini= tely=C2=A0+1 on that one.=C2=A0
    Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to = be a huge fan of it so I'm=C2=A0+1 on that option as well :)

    Discord might= be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight preference there, but = long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option.
    Curious what others think.

    On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA <akhos= la@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    3D""
    Hi all,=

    I was wondering if there would be any interest in= moving from Gitter to another platform. The main reason I bring this up is= because Gitter could be out of the way for a lot of us and the application= doesn't encourage dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school an= d signing up for the Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason = for such a cryptic interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list= is sybil resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permission= s to the lists. I think scaling the community requires something better tha= n email and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this.
    =
    Couple problems with Gitter:
    1. Clunky in= terface
    2. Poor separation of conversations/rooms
    3. Bad search f= unction
    4. Bad mobile app

    Some alte= rnatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev communities:<= /div>

    Pros:
    1. Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement)
    2. Self = hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with scripts
      3. <= li>Slack-like interface
    3. Good search functionality
    4. Threads are being implemente= d
    5. Usable mobile applications
    6. Actively maintained + marketpl= ace integrations
    7. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would be= happy to help).
    8. Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter.
      9. Cons:
    1. Not as well known as discord, sla= ck or gitter from what I can tell, but I expect it to continue to grow in u= sage down the line and gain even more support than it already has.

    Discord
    Pros:
    =
    1. Commonly used
    2. Free to use unlike sack
    3. Fast and = friendly
    4. Solid mobile apps
    5. Actively maintained
    6. No s= elf hosting or maintenance
    7. Supports integrations
    Cons= :
    1. May not be free forever
    2. Chat logs are= owned by Discord
    3. More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some co= lleagues and I describe it as heavier

    Th= is list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please chime in if= you have a personal preference or have something to say about these platfo= rms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives, you can gen= erally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what you like best= .

    =
    3D""=
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS


    --
    =
    Best regards,
    Yuriy=C2=A0@html5cat=C2=A0Dybskiy

    e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com
    phone: +1 (650) = 434-2004

    Dybskiy.com /=C2=A0Twitter=C2=A0/=C2=A0GitHub=C2=A0/=C2=A0<= a href=3D"http://ca.linkedin.com/in/dybskiy" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_= blank">Linkedin
    <= /div>
    _._,_._,_
    Links:

    You receive all messages sent to this group.

    View/Reply Online (#85) | Reply To Sender =20 | Reply To Group =20 | =20 Mute This Topic =20 | New Topic

    Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org]

    _._,_._,_

    --000000000000d9e20d05810f3adf-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 07:29:48 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E76D130FF2 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:40:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.039 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.039 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AC_DIV_BONANZA=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FXuQG2ATXdkc for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:40:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it1-x143.google.com (mail-it1-x143.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2188130F24 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:40:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x143.google.com with SMTP id g85so6805440ita.3 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:date:in-reply-to:references:subject:message-id:from:to :cc; bh=/3PfQRwaZ1e2BuYDsGnz3LP8pGKLXsyYcBGoVFaXcdY=; b=jeeiRtGM9HAqz9PKO+LmSpGJOvHnm/qqLl+j3WUFYMuqwLpDgxhOydWGaDMsnbDF+D etMFKcOv4S1jVoIQJDBDeTrF49eEa8U1rEXrvOLNjmTuhqNvuvDYRT01BSwhjgjSY1me S2pAxjm8MqC3LrZlhIANYk9rJiUODxiu+PErBA3YqCYzNYDqDgY2xRFpAOmpCUGxvhFf TdLvgolnnXvNcwd5tPPeR8zA/t9n1T7L/xpl95uWnaJDIz8Uwow43M3QvdgsZ62gv1nZ KsVZjjGWeRkB8dBZt83DFBIpV4/p07+p5R6eoN9eYWFwQaU0AroDHkacBbQz5HRLzOE2 dWgQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:in-reply-to:references:subject :message-id:from:to:cc; bh=/3PfQRwaZ1e2BuYDsGnz3LP8pGKLXsyYcBGoVFaXcdY=; b=JNaBUJPXwCvc/2INgFEdckoaXDojU6UjaV3Fqa/qHz9mZgiAbImj4oxrvRHiZi74Tx W/CX94YQ8vAbtRPKG2MjIrg9YpPK4DxG2FdkkQTd94EwN6W3eAuBkhP8nDmN4GEm4i2l 3HHzu2ahRrRqqHbWBu83yHNj0XxrZIzU2Cy7OIUxSnF7dUe4WcRqPizz4ythzRYWljaz Jlv6HLLxgvfpFNDBJ/NsoWU3IjXhqkgjYYExAOhfb2EhKkne1E4jp7Xru4QSn0i+DHNg dtb0nRL5iH6JVkJcX3kyLsBcI05JnbShcnyq7xbF1D/ZEFcKfzGSgkbjF/U6/MjHNymk hc0A== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuY/cY6tjysEU5jPt7xy47/GnAzCp5klpOSzv7/yOLV2vbN2pdi5 up7bGbT2rMWzFa9hOtUwdrU8ytGuPnI/zg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYz8/1ZfS0jO+QZ02F7roU5yeUgkq6/ZtLoiHg7qLouYqDX33Ltax+aCijXQN2SzXZBrfx3Kw== X-Received: by 2002:a24:e40d:: with SMTP id o13mr2311872ith.152.1549359612546; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (135.166.192.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.192.166.135]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z124sm2098101itz.42.2019.02.05.01.40.12 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:12 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:03 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1549326965.local-940fe1b0-72bb-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> References: <1549326965.local-940fe1b0-72bb-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> X-Polymail-Id: <5c59540bfe15d65c4a000008@polymail.io> Message-ID: <5c59540bfe15d65c4a000008@polymail.io> From: "AKASH KHOSLA" To: "Evan Schwartz" , "Brian Kerr" Cc: "David Fuelling" , "Bhaves Shah" , "Daniel Carroll" , "Yuriy Dybskiy" , "ledger@ietf.org" , "public-interledger@w3.org" X-Mailer: Polymail Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=dbba3330e54f7ae8cb1816b7d7ffa22179db00a06fe1f0a768f9872bb47d Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 07:29:39 -0800 Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 09:40:20 -0000 --dbba3330e54f7ae8cb1816b7d7ffa22179db00a06fe1f0a768f9872bb47d Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Based on the comments received and talking to people offline I think what's= best going forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an asynchronous= forum to replace email , and have the synchronous chat that replaces Gitte= r be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to avoid developer ov= erhead. The only questions are now: -What subdomain should the Discourse be at?=C2=A0forum.interledger.org? or= =C2=A0disc.interledger.org or research.interledger.org?=C2=A0 -Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for di= scussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on=C2=A0https://et= hresear.ch/ )? I'm leaning more towards this, and I think that's the most e= ffective way to use the platform while ensuring the Interledger community s= teers toward productive discussions. Early on, we can be lenient about this= and enforce as needed.=C2=A0 -Should we use bridging software?=C2=A0=C2=A0( https://github.com/42wim/mat= terbridge ) Note that this is not ideal, because moderation is fragmented, = and the interoperability aspect basically relies on a bot receiving message= s from another client and pushing it to a chat log. You can see the demos o= n matterbridge to see what I mean.=C2=A0 -Assuming money not an issue, it looks like Slack is the preferred way to d= o things vs. Discord. Only downside is that Slack's interface for joining c= hats is not great (requires an auto-invite tool to be hosted), but I think = that's ok, I've generally had better community experiences through Slack de= spite that. As long as we have a Discourse that stays with us forever with most of the = valuable information, we can always move our synchronous chat if it ever be= comes a problem. *Akash Khosla* Fourth Year EECS akhosla@berkeley.edu On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz wrote: >=20 > I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and > asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread. >=20 > Sync >=20 >=20 > *=20 > Current : Gitter >=20 > *=20 > Use case : support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion >=20 > *=20 > Main problems : low response rate because a) there aren't enough > contributors who are dedicating time to field issues (myself included) an= d > b) few people have Gitter open all the time so checking for new messages > is an extra step >=20 > *=20 > My take : Slack isn't great for open source projects but it is the one th= at > most Interledger contributors have sitting open while they're working, so > if we're optimizing for making sure people get help that might be the bes= t > one >=20 >=20 >=20 > Async >=20 >=20 > *=20 > Current : Github Issues, Mailing List >=20 > *=20 > Use case : design discussion, brainstorming >=20 > *=20 > Main problems : Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sending > emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyone's > inbox >=20 > *=20 > My take : Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of > the Rust and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how differen= t > the participation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues > and PRs. >=20 >=20 >=20 > PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion! >=20 >=20 > On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr < brian@kava.io > wrote: >=20 >> If we want to expand the community, I definitely would recommend switchi= ng >> to something that isn't forcing people to learn a new app.=C2=A0 Adding = the >> hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding and engagement.=C2=A0 >>=20 >>=20 >> I'd recommend slack or discord because most people already have the apps >> and are familiar with how to use them.=C2=A0 >>=20 >> Brian Kerr >> Co-founder >> Kava.io >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling < fuelling@ripple.com > >> wrote: >>=20 >>> +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support=C2=A0 >>> https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice= ). >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Agree we need to move off of Gitter. >>>=20 >>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla < akhosla@berkeley.edu > wr= ote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid >>>> confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which >>>> regularly uses Gitter. >>>>=20 >>>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald < sbonewald@linuxfounda= tion.org >>>> > wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> Hello, >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the proj= ects >>>>> at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system.=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Http://Chat.hyperledger.org ( http://Http://Chat.hyperledger.org ) wh= ich is >>>>> rocket chat.=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A Linu= x >>>>> foundation ID.=C2=A0 Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux fo= undation >>>>> and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has = to >>>>> work within the larger community of Hyperledger.=C2=A0 We have a unif= ied >>>>> standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more on = the wiki.hyperledger.org >>>>> ( http://wiki.hyperledger.org )=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> Silona >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll < daniel.carroll@securebloc= kchains.com >>>>> wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>> It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms.=C2= =A0 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing o= f >>>>>> information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown informati= on >>>>>> into categories and maintain a logical history.=C2=A0 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team >>>>>> attempting productivity.=C2=A0 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Dan >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah < bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.co= m > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution = that is >>>>>>> seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the commu= nity >>>>>>> grows, although cost could be an issue later.. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> You may want to check - =C2=A0https://flock.com/ >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Cheers! >>>>>>> Bhaves >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy < yuriy@dybskiy.com > wro= te: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Akash, really great proposal! >>>>>>>> I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely=C2= =A0+1 on that >>>>>>>> one.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>> Rocket.chat ( http://rocket.chat/ ) is built with Meteor and I use= d to be a >>>>>>>> huge fan of it so I'm=C2=A0+1 on that option as well :) >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight >>>>>>>> preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat ( http://rocket.= chat/ ) is >>>>>>>> a better option. >>>>>>>> Curious what others think. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA < akhosla@berkeley.edu= > wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Git= ter to >>>>>>>>> another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitt= er could >>>>>>>>> be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't enc= ourage >>>>>>>>> dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up = for the >>>>>>>>> Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a = cryptic >>>>>>>>> interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil >>>>>>>>> resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permission= s to the >>>>>>>>> lists. I think scaling the community requires something better th= an email >>>>>>>>> and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Couple problems with Gitter: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Clunky interface >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Poor separation of conversations/rooms >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Bad search function >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Bad mobile app >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known i= n dev >>>>>>>>> communities: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *Rocket.chat ( https://rocket.chat/ )* >>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy wit= h scripts >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Slack-like interface >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Good search functionality >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Threads ( >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/RocketChat/Rocket.Chat/pull/11803#issuecomment= -455963816 >>>>>>>>> ) are being implemented >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Usable mobile applications >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Actively maintained + marketplace integrations >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Can deploy at chat.interledger.org ( http://chat.interledger.org = ) (would >>>>>>>>> be happy to help). >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tel= l, but I >>>>>>>>> expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain eve= n more >>>>>>>>> support than it already has. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *Discord* >>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Commonly used >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Free to use unlike sack >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Fast and friendly >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Solid mobile apps >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Actively maintained >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> No self hosting or maintenance >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Supports integrations >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> May not be free forever >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Chat logs are owned by Discord >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I d= escribe >>>>>>>>> it as heavier >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please= chime in >>>>>>>>> if you have a personal preference or have something to say about = these >>>>>>>>> platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives,= you can >>>>>>>>> generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what = you like >>>>>>>>> best. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *Akash Khosla* >>>>>>>>> Fourth Year EECS >>>>>>>>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>> Yuriy=C2=A0@html5cat ( http://twitter.com/html5cat )=C2=A0Dybskiy >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com >>>>>>>> phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Dybskiy.com ( http://dybskiy.com ) /=C2=A0Twitter ( http://twitter= .com/html5cat >>>>>>>> )=C2=A0/=C2=A0GitHub ( http://github.com/html5cat )=C2=A0/=C2=A0Li= nkedin ( >>>>>>>> http://ca.linkedin..com/in/dybskiy ) >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>> Links: >>>>>> You receive all messages sent to this group. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> View/Reply Online (#85) ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/mess= age/85 >>>>>> ) | Reply To Sender ( >>>>>> ?subject=3DPrivate:%20Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20Prop= osal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else >>>>>> ) | Reply To Group ( >>>>>> quilt@lists.hyperledger.org?subject=3DRe:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%2= 0Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else >>>>>> ) | Mute This Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/mt/29637867/1540= 173 ) | >>>>>> New Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post ) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Your Subscription ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/editsub/15= 40173 ) >>>>>> | Contact Group Owner ( quilt+owner@lists.hyperledger.org ) | Unsubs= cribe ( >>>>>> https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/unsub ) [ sbonewald@linuxfound= ation.org >>>>>> ] >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > --dbba3330e54f7ae8cb1816b7d7ffa22179db00a06fe1f0a768f9872bb47d Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 3D""
    Based on the comments re= ceived and talking to people offline I think what's best going forward is t= o create a self-hosted Discourse as= an asynchronous forum to replace email, and have the synchronous ch= at that replaces Gitter be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms= to avoid developer overhead.

    = The only questions are now:
    -What subdomain should the = Discourse be at? forum.interle= dger.org? or disc.inter= ledger.org or research.interledger.org? 
    -D= oes it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for disc= ussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on https://ethresear.ch/)? I'm leaning more towards = this, and I think that's the most effective way to use the platform while e= nsuring the Interledger community steers toward productive discussions. Ear= ly on, we can be lenient about this and enforce as needed. 

    <= div style=3D"font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-varia= nt-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; font-family: -apple-= system, system-ui, "segoe ui", roboto, oxygen, ubuntu, cantarell,= "fira sans", "droid sans", "helvetica neue",= sans-serif;">As long as we have a Discourse that stays with us forever wit= h most of the valuable information, we can always move our synchronous chat= if it ever becomes a problem.
    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS

    On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz <= evan@ripple.com> wrote:
    I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and async= hronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread.

    Sync
    • Current: = Gitter
    • Use case:= support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion
    • Main= problems: low response rate becaus= e a) there aren't enough contributors who are dedicating time to field issu= es (myself included) and b) few people have Gitter open all the time so che= cking for new messages is an extra step
    • My take: Slack isn't great for open source projects= but it is the one that most Interledger contributors have sitting open whi= le they're working, so if we're optimizing for making sure people get help = that might be the best one
    Async
    • Curr= ent: Github Issues, Mailing List
    • Use case: design d= iscussion, brainstorming
    • Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, se= nding emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyon= e's inbox
    • My take: Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of the Rust= and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how different the part= icipation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues and PRs.
    PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off th= is discussion!

    =
    On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr <brian@kava.io> wrote:
    If we want to expand the community, I = definitely would recommend switching to something that isn't forcing people= to learn a new app.  Adding the hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding = and engagement. 

    I'd recommend sla= ck or discord because most people already have the apps and are familiar wi= th how to use them. 

    Brian Kerr
    Co-founder
    Kava.io



    On Mon, Feb 04, 201= 9 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling <fuelling@ripple.com> wrote:
    +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support 
    https://www.discou= rse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice).

    <= /div>
    Agree we need to move off of Gitter.

    On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wr= ote:
    Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperle= dger side to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger wo= rking group which regularly uses Gitter.

    On Mon, Fe= b 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald <sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org= > wrote:
    Hello,

    Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here 
    <= div>
    I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. Al= l of the projects at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. <= /div>

    Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat. <= /div>

    Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creati= ng an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID.  Hyperledger also is a project und= er the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those standards as we= ll.

    As a community and especially quilt bring an i= nteropability tool has to work within the larger community of Hyperledger.&= nbsp; We have a unified standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger projec= t process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org 

    Thank you,
    Silona

    On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Dani= el Carroll <daniel.carroll@secureblockchains.com wrot= e:
    It would likely be good to have a coupl= e of different platforms. 

    I like Discord and= Telegram for community chat and general sharing of information. But both a= re limited in how you can breakdown information into categories and maintai= n a logical history. 

    I like Slack and Trello= for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity. 

    Dan

    On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, = Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.com> wrote:

    <= div>
    I assume when looking at the community at large w= e want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has the feature set to= grow as the community grows, although cost could be an issue later..
    =

    You may want to check -  https://flock.com/

    Cheers!
    =
    Bhaves

    On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybs= kiy <yuriy@dybskiy.c= om> wrote:

    = Akash, really great proposal!
    I've been u= sing Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that one.&nb= sp;
    Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of i= t so I'm +1 on that option as well :)

    = Discord might be the easiest to = setup and more polished so slight preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option.
    Curious what others think.

    On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrot= e:
    Hi all,

    =
    I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter t= o another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could= be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage de= dicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the Inte= rledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic interf= ace for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil resistance and = anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the lists. I think s= caling the community requires something better than email and Gitter. Would= be great to hear thoughts on this.

    Couple p= roblems with Gitter:
    1. Clunky interface
    2. =
      Poor separation of conversations/rooms
    3. Bad search f= unction
    4. Bad mobile app

    Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in = dev communities:

    Pros:
      <= li>
      Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement)
      <= li>
      Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with = scripts
    1. Slack-like interface
    2. Good sea= rch functionality
    3. Threads are being implemented<= /div>
    4. Usable mobile applications
    5. Actively m= aintained + marketplace integrations



    --
    Best regar= ds,
    Yuriy=  @html5cat Dybskiy

    phone: +1 (650) 434-2004
    _._,_._= ,_
    Links:
    You receive all messages sent to this = group.

    View/Reply Online (#85)<= /a> | Reply To Sender | = Reply To Group | Mute This Topic | <= a href=3D"https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post" title=3D"https://list= s.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow noopener = noreferrer">New Topic


    _._,_._,_

    --dbba3330e54f7ae8cb1816b7d7ffa22179db00a06fe1f0a768f9872bb47d-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 07:29:53 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD98130F24 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:40:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.039 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.039 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AC_DIV_BONANZA=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7mFyh_dXxCaj for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:40:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it1-x142.google.com (mail-it1-x142.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2175130F46 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 01:40:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x142.google.com with SMTP id a6so6563632itl.4 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:to :cc; bh=bVvI5jTmc2ykell0SL2KVf7uxU67yZVm4Bm4LuAOfs8=; b=JwsoLUAU68kRKyPvUVxC7nlRhcO18YyWr9jnI250GDB5uUBXHSIYpAeY7qMQUl+HMZ ljxMhivUCuD/P+QniwGybJvkh0QQ9Gu/RrzeaSbpjhyfM3028N2PDAIexkk7W04QWJ9p M08VUWTRjKQN2By6a2CZYLKMuHJYaZN0Aqgwt5CPnd2MjCnBQR5hWvYIBiCMDzwOR2SE fUrDCqF0XlaZYvubgmvjeHNImFgPsUtBtl793W9C/3/76VUaarHBI18ApcNJPajw2HIM VkSOIZ5S+vuGaCchIhIG/VGb5iBa/7nZUkamh12jXiZYIiSt6t1VIibuc3FeP8E4bXxk IFgQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:references:from:date :in-reply-to:message-id:to:cc; bh=bVvI5jTmc2ykell0SL2KVf7uxU67yZVm4Bm4LuAOfs8=; b=BQVjwsZuMG9UnBDCW6crb61Nh5Qw+fdem8EMFiAV6ik7o47dFhzAveBpkJnai+sn11 7O1eMUN0sV3DsVZAHHfQ0sKvdR2fO2kc5QEpTaqwJqo+ciX5bBi+s4M2O0E8Jxu8NChP NnG7DUas2IIqK87VqFkNfnozN1L2fBj9V71wPM6ZR/a9Xdp85a9krU1C6Fip9OFLYCC6 27tN/Go41KcbWWtLrNJ6q4WIoZyeyLgKqZWH8DehB3o60oacirmZY+MPszIrr8QTR4VQ 0nYtfmUn+Of46O9BVE/m8zuSk95tnPALa/kAxxL8afqprHIiOjbWirp85AQaZR60BRXE QW2g== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuYosvoW6a0j33VtqAOsjk/B8n3KxvTJyHVOKNiVNAREKUsIUHFb KMvnW5qUIDnK+kO6jCy1Yu4C2f2tFLd6Ew== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ib9xxGuCEp3maknagLcrRjYOSaptniPJ4X2YRGy1ZgpYScYpxwRzpWDEkG1h7MJpX4Ov6agGw== X-Received: by 2002:a24:3e43:: with SMTP id s64mr2359080its.111.1549359617932; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (135.166.192.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.192.166.135]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k18sm1170505ioa.39.2019.02.05.01.40.17 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:17 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <1549326965.local-940fe1b0-72bb-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> X-Mailer: Polymail X-Polymail-Id: <5c59540bfe15d65c4a000008@polymail.io> From: "AKASH KHOSLA" Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 01:40:03 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1549326965.local-940fe1b0-72bb-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> Message-ID: <5c59540bfe15d65c4a000008@polymail.io> To: "Evan Schwartz" , "Brian Kerr" Cc: "David Fuelling" , "Bhaves Shah" , "Daniel Carroll" , "Yuriy Dybskiy" , "ledger@ietf.org" , "public-interledger@w3.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=b328e6a9861cfa7e80a53c7c0432f1df88e63aa294075cc834aba757721b Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 07:29:39 -0800 Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 09:40:24 -0000 --b328e6a9861cfa7e80a53c7c0432f1df88e63aa294075cc834aba757721b Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Based on the comments received and talking to people offline I think what's= best going forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an asynchronous= forum to replace email , and have the synchronous chat that replaces Gitte= r be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to avoid developer ov= erhead. The only questions are now: -What subdomain should the Discourse be at?=C2=A0forum.interledger.org? or= =C2=A0disc.interledger.org or research.interledger.org?=C2=A0 -Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for di= scussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on=C2=A0https://et= hresear.ch/ )? I'm leaning more towards this, and I think that's the most e= ffective way to use the platform while ensuring the Interledger community s= teers toward productive discussions. Early on, we can be lenient about this= and enforce as needed.=C2=A0 -Should we use bridging software?=C2=A0=C2=A0( https://github.com/42wim/mat= terbridge ) Note that this is not ideal, because moderation is fragmented, = and the interoperability aspect basically relies on a bot receiving message= s from another client and pushing it to a chat log. You can see the demos o= n matterbridge to see what I mean.=C2=A0 -Assuming money not an issue, it looks like Slack is the preferred way to d= o things vs. Discord. Only downside is that Slack's interface for joining c= hats is not great (requires an auto-invite tool to be hosted), but I think = that's ok, I've generally had better community experiences through Slack de= spite that. As long as we have a Discourse that stays with us forever with most of the = valuable information, we can always move our synchronous chat if it ever be= comes a problem. *Akash Khosla* Fourth Year EECS akhosla@berkeley.edu On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz wrote: >=20 > I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and > asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread. >=20 > Sync >=20 >=20 > *=20 > Current : Gitter >=20 > *=20 > Use case : support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion >=20 > *=20 > Main problems : low response rate because a) there aren't enough > contributors who are dedicating time to field issues (myself included) an= d > b) few people have Gitter open all the time so checking for new messages > is an extra step >=20 > *=20 > My take : Slack isn't great for open source projects but it is the one th= at > most Interledger contributors have sitting open while they're working, so > if we're optimizing for making sure people get help that might be the bes= t > one >=20 >=20 >=20 > Async >=20 >=20 > *=20 > Current : Github Issues, Mailing List >=20 > *=20 > Use case : design discussion, brainstorming >=20 > *=20 > Main problems : Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sending > emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyone's > inbox >=20 > *=20 > My take : Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of > the Rust and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how differen= t > the participation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues > and PRs. >=20 >=20 >=20 > PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion! >=20 >=20 > On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr < brian@kava.io > wrote: >=20 >> If we want to expand the community, I definitely would recommend switchi= ng >> to something that isn't forcing people to learn a new app.=C2=A0 Adding = the >> hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding and engagement.=C2=A0 >>=20 >>=20 >> I'd recommend slack or discord because most people already have the apps >> and are familiar with how to use them.=C2=A0 >>=20 >> Brian Kerr >> Co-founder >> Kava.io >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling < fuelling@ripple.com > >> wrote: >>=20 >>> +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support=C2=A0 >>> https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice= ). >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Agree we need to move off of Gitter. >>>=20 >>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla < akhosla@berkeley.edu > wr= ote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid >>>> confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which >>>> regularly uses Gitter. >>>>=20 >>>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald < sbonewald@linuxfounda= tion.org >>>> > wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> Hello, >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the proj= ects >>>>> at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system.=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Http://Chat.hyperledger.org ( http://Http://Chat.hyperledger.org ) wh= ich is >>>>> rocket chat.=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A Linu= x >>>>> foundation ID.=C2=A0 Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux fo= undation >>>>> and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has = to >>>>> work within the larger community of Hyperledger.=C2=A0 We have a unif= ied >>>>> standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more on = the wiki.hyperledger.org >>>>> ( http://wiki.hyperledger.org )=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> Silona >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll < daniel.carroll@securebloc= kchains.com >>>>> wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>> It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms.=C2= =A0 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing o= f >>>>>> information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown informati= on >>>>>> into categories and maintain a logical history.=C2=A0 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team >>>>>> attempting productivity.=C2=A0 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Dan >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah < bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.co= m > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution = that is >>>>>>> seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the commu= nity >>>>>>> grows, although cost could be an issue later.. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> You may want to check - =C2=A0https://flock.com/ >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Cheers! >>>>>>> Bhaves >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy < yuriy@dybskiy.com > wro= te: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Akash, really great proposal! >>>>>>>> I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely=C2= =A0+1 on that >>>>>>>> one.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>> Rocket.chat ( http://rocket.chat/ ) is built with Meteor and I use= d to be a >>>>>>>> huge fan of it so I'm=C2=A0+1 on that option as well :) >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight >>>>>>>> preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat ( http://rocket.= chat/ ) is >>>>>>>> a better option. >>>>>>>> Curious what others think. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA < akhosla@berkeley.edu= > wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Git= ter to >>>>>>>>> another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitt= er could >>>>>>>>> be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't enc= ourage >>>>>>>>> dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up = for the >>>>>>>>> Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a = cryptic >>>>>>>>> interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil >>>>>>>>> resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permission= s to the >>>>>>>>> lists. I think scaling the community requires something better th= an email >>>>>>>>> and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Couple problems with Gitter: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Clunky interface >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Poor separation of conversations/rooms >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Bad search function >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Bad mobile app >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known i= n dev >>>>>>>>> communities: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *Rocket.chat ( https://rocket.chat/ )* >>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy wit= h scripts >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Slack-like interface >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Good search functionality >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Threads ( >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/RocketChat/Rocket.Chat/pull/11803#issuecomment= -455963816 >>>>>>>>> ) are being implemented >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Usable mobile applications >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Actively maintained + marketplace integrations >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Can deploy at chat.interledger.org ( http://chat.interledger.org = ) (would >>>>>>>>> be happy to help). >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tel= l, but I >>>>>>>>> expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain eve= n more >>>>>>>>> support than it already has. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *Discord* >>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Commonly used >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Free to use unlike sack >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Fast and friendly >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Solid mobile apps >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Actively maintained >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> No self hosting or maintenance >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Supports integrations >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> May not be free forever >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> Chat logs are owned by Discord >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>> More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I d= escribe >>>>>>>>> it as heavier >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please= chime in >>>>>>>>> if you have a personal preference or have something to say about = these >>>>>>>>> platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives,= you can >>>>>>>>> generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what = you like >>>>>>>>> best. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> *Akash Khosla* >>>>>>>>> Fourth Year EECS >>>>>>>>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>> Yuriy=C2=A0@html5cat ( http://twitter.com/html5cat )=C2=A0Dybskiy >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com >>>>>>>> phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Dybskiy.com ( http://dybskiy.com ) /=C2=A0Twitter ( http://twitter= .com/html5cat >>>>>>>> )=C2=A0/=C2=A0GitHub ( http://github.com/html5cat )=C2=A0/=C2=A0Li= nkedin ( >>>>>>>> http://ca.linkedin..com/in/dybskiy ) >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>> Links: >>>>>> You receive all messages sent to this group. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> View/Reply Online (#85) ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/mess= age/85 >>>>>> ) | Reply To Sender ( >>>>>> ?subject=3DPrivate:%20Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20Prop= osal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else >>>>>> ) | Reply To Group ( >>>>>> quilt@lists.hyperledger.org?subject=3DRe:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%2= 0Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else >>>>>> ) | Mute This Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/mt/29637867/1540= 173 ) | >>>>>> New Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post ) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Your Subscription ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/editsub/15= 40173 ) >>>>>> | Contact Group Owner ( quilt+owner@lists.hyperledger.org ) | Unsubs= cribe ( >>>>>> https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/unsub ) [ sbonewald@linuxfound= ation.org >>>>>> ] >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > --b328e6a9861cfa7e80a53c7c0432f1df88e63aa294075cc834aba757721b Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 3D""
    Based on the comments re= ceived and talking to people offline I think what's best going forward is t= o create a self-hosted Discourse as= an asynchronous forum to replace email, and have the synchronous ch= at that replaces Gitter be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms= to avoid developer overhead.

    = The only questions are now:
    -What subdomain should the = Discourse be at? forum.interle= dger.org? or disc.inter= ledger.org or research.interledger.org? 
    -D= oes it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for disc= ussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on https://ethresear.ch/)? I'm leaning more towards = this, and I think that's the most effective way to use the platform while e= nsuring the Interledger community steers toward productive discussions. Ear= ly on, we can be lenient about this and enforce as needed. 

    <= div style=3D"font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-varia= nt-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; font-family: -apple-= system, system-ui, "segoe ui", roboto, oxygen, ubuntu, cantarell,= "fira sans", "droid sans", "helvetica neue",= sans-serif;">As long as we have a Discourse that stays with us forever wit= h most of the valuable information, we can always move our synchronous chat= if it ever becomes a problem.
    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS

    On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz <= evan@ripple.com> wrote:
    I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and async= hronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread.

    Sync
    • Current: = Gitter
    • Use case:= support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion
    • Main= problems: low response rate becaus= e a) there aren't enough contributors who are dedicating time to field issu= es (myself included) and b) few people have Gitter open all the time so che= cking for new messages is an extra step
    • My take: Slack isn't great for open source projects= but it is the one that most Interledger contributors have sitting open whi= le they're working, so if we're optimizing for making sure people get help = that might be the best one
    Async
    • Curr= ent: Github Issues, Mailing List
    • Use case: design d= iscussion, brainstorming
    • Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, se= nding emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyon= e's inbox
    • My take: Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of the Rust= and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how different the part= icipation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues and PRs.
    PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off th= is discussion!

    =
    On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr <brian@kava.io> wrote:
    If we want to expand the community, I = definitely would recommend switching to something that isn't forcing people= to learn a new app.  Adding the hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding = and engagement. 

    I'd recommend sla= ck or discord because most people already have the apps and are familiar wi= th how to use them. 

    Brian Kerr
    Co-founder
    Kava.io



    On Mon, Feb 04, 201= 9 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling <fuelling@ripple.com> wrote:
    +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support 
    https://www.discou= rse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice).

    <= /div>
    Agree we need to move off of Gitter.

    On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wr= ote:
    Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperle= dger side to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger wo= rking group which regularly uses Gitter.

    On Mon, Fe= b 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald <sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org= > wrote:
    Hello,

    Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here 
    <= div>
    I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. Al= l of the projects at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. <= /div>

    Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat. <= /div>

    Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creati= ng an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID.  Hyperledger also is a project und= er the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those standards as we= ll.

    As a community and especially quilt bring an i= nteropability tool has to work within the larger community of Hyperledger.&= nbsp; We have a unified standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger projec= t process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org 

    Thank you,
    Silona

    On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Dani= el Carroll <daniel.carroll@secureblockchains.com wrot= e:
    It would likely be good to have a coupl= e of different platforms. 

    I like Discord and= Telegram for community chat and general sharing of information. But both a= re limited in how you can breakdown information into categories and maintai= n a logical history. 

    I like Slack and Trello= for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity. 

    Dan

    On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, = Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.com> wrote:

    <= div>
    I assume when looking at the community at large w= e want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has the feature set to= grow as the community grows, although cost could be an issue later..
    =

    You may want to check -  https://flock.com/

    Cheers!
    =
    Bhaves

    On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybs= kiy <yuriy@dybskiy.c= om> wrote:

    = Akash, really great proposal!
    I've been u= sing Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that one.&nb= sp;
    Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of i= t so I'm +1 on that option as well :)

    = Discord might be the easiest to = setup and more polished so slight preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option.
    Curious what others think.

    On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrot= e:
    Hi all,

    =
    I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter t= o another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could= be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage de= dicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the Inte= rledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic interf= ace for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil resistance and = anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the lists. I think s= caling the community requires something better than email and Gitter. Would= be great to hear thoughts on this.

    Couple p= roblems with Gitter:
    1. Clunky interface
    2. =
      Poor separation of conversations/rooms
    3. Bad search f= unction
    4. Bad mobile app

    Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in = dev communities:

    Pros:
      <= li>
      Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement)
      <= li>
      Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with = scripts
    1. Slack-like interface
    2. Good sea= rch functionality
    3. Threads are being implemented<= /div>
    4. Usable mobile applications
    5. Actively m= aintained + marketplace integrations



    --
    Best regar= ds,
    Yuriy=  @html5cat Dybskiy

    phone: +1 (650) 434-2004
    _._,_._= ,_
    Links:
    You receive all messages sent to this = group.

    View/Reply Online (#85)<= /a> | Reply To Sender | = Reply To Group | Mute This Topic | <= a href=3D"https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post" title=3D"https://list= s.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow noopener = noreferrer">New Topic


    _._,_._,_

    --b328e6a9861cfa7e80a53c7c0432f1df88e63aa294075cc834aba757721b-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 07:29:56 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8596130FF2 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 03:20:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.031 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.031 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H-XD4IzQ2opm for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 03:20:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it1-x144.google.com (mail-it1-x144.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 671B912958B for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 03:20:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x144.google.com with SMTP id b5so7267370iti.2 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 03:20:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:cc:references:subject:date:in-reply-to:from:to :message-id; bh=/5GfmcoxqXOZ5UW+cOMULyj/EAweVfqRrI9CacQwvNc=; b=Houvir3r9rhIvGhL0pyBsH2TUSPONzp18wfz5PCfS/nAuLvlrayop/+2Y6oI6o01JI 7p7SH9R+yu00TnHamdZlw8For6QrW2prbn2gR/1MCHc/jSl3OglCBY7AEI5gz+m789RN HtX4iZYmwxEn+aGn7RL6a+o8/OB58mSmIeV/mXXUN1mJ+mPtDzy4+eFMlCRPWn842PHv Jb2avpET4QqRwL9QxqvFQJq3DA/D8OxlmQA5Mu43JuTOamIroyYW7ZKTruUV8AXGq90U vXi0cXKVT9EdY7h7YXN/2mhytylB0WUkmlbh2R8HhHHyq9ie6hmaXINcViFtSYqUuy9X 2vzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:cc:references:subject:date :in-reply-to:from:to:message-id; bh=/5GfmcoxqXOZ5UW+cOMULyj/EAweVfqRrI9CacQwvNc=; b=YknHXyQwKKkCv/I3HbwByTs2q9j52r3jzWiTvU47ZFvjCXXXPIq8SPGWOYmE3xyBDm /eZqIIl2WDzfa+SxPin5Mb2xzFCG/amTLxD42/kGZ8GBqAHjO/gqv9iSUViVCjHj6kKx oX047v/ydVrUnPvU9UhoDlbe4V68UL0EvXZe8E2r7VI6h0VZxaMHtcIoXB5yc5BHjR3+ k9xJC0zQsJQqfMSCvhJyclCsnjoAwGAY4dbCXprgrpi/ebPqA3WMCYYVzg173qbAQ74x CJoTUwDwjgf/B75zgq7XUTBW3MYy7/kZWtXH1HMFqI9Lk0wOamOHxs6sKWX9tE5RVeQq /w8w== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZkTpJaReqdpyGm55WO8SuVcITXmKLUKcn4t7gNWQBtJQnP8/50 j9iYPsoiOsFh7JmRJPOrYGXfqcfRdSqMdQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYTWiylLZTuKnD9jQYb/T5Dqv978ztxGrqP8hZ1/EcdA+xgSmxPVN2GepvmavKND6bbKxYUqg== X-Received: by 2002:a5e:d50b:: with SMTP id e11mr81968iom.53.1549365639471; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 03:20:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (137.175.238.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.238.175.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b188sm1642976itc.9.2019.02.05.03.20.39 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 03:20:39 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "Interledger Community Group" , "Interledger Mailing List - IETF" , hyperledger-quilt@lists.hyperledger.org References: X-Polymail-Id: <5c596dbebf32932a88000009@polymail.io> Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 03:20:28 -0800 In-Reply-To: From: "AKASH KHOSLA" To: "Per Lind" X-Mailer: Polymail Message-ID: <5c596dbebf32932a88000009@polymail.io> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=c5847fdc1e8321538277ca770302d0988fd92ec50b530992de0547d74058 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 07:29:39 -0800 Subject: Re: [Ledger] Reading the old design papers of the internet X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 11:20:45 -0000 --c5847fdc1e8321538277ca770302d0988fd92ec50b530992de0547d74058 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 One quote I like from The Design Philosophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols= : "The goal of permitting distributed management of the Internet has certai= nly been met in certain aspects." certainly. "For example, not all of the g= ateways in the Internet are implemented and managed by the same agency." In today's world, we see a push for decentralization happening with all the= se new crypto protocols pushing for sound, open money standards. But what d= egree of distribution makes for a good monetary datagram protocol? And what= does distribution mean in the case of Interledger and payment channel netw= orks in general? Should we shy away from these internet designs for money b= ecause they aren't decentralized enough?=C2=A0 >From what I gather after these reading papers and others (will post another= email this week with more readings) hub and spoke is the best way to speed= up adoption/deployment and I think makes the best balance between performa= nt networks and end-to-end arguments. Escaping this convergence requires a = devolution of the monetary system because network-flow market-share needs t= o be measured by resources for security purposes, and only way to not have = that is to be communist, essentially. *Akash Khosla* Fourth Year EECS akhosla@berkeley.edu On Sun, Feb 3rd, 2019 at 1:55 PM, Per Lind wrot= e: >=20 > Hi Akash, >=20 >=20 > I agree wholeheartedly.=C2=A0 >=20 >=20 > Best,=C2=A0 >=20 >=20 > Per Lind=C2=A0 > Co-founder=C2=A0 > Toridion Quantum Computing Lab=C2=A0 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, 22:52 AKASH KHOSLA, < akhosla@berkeley.edu > wrote: >=20 >=20 >> Boxbe ( https://www.boxbe.com/overview ) AKASH KHOSLA ( akhosla@berkeley= .edu >> ) is on your Guest List ( >> https://www.boxbe.com/approved-list?tc_serial=3D47652602796&tc_rand=3D20= 77553940&utm_source=3Dstf&utm_medium=3Demail&utm_campaign=3DANNO_SELF&utm_c= ontent=3D001&key=3Dpfp9o0aprdql4jCeEcR8wp5d76lT0nDuooTwJ3X1HpQ%3D&token=3Dt= 42fpyKw2nSmy2htq36aT2Z2J%2Fp7PtVo2GNwWs%2B%2BT7YGlF4iR1fuCrvnmVNr4vbp >> ) | Delete this guest ( >> https://www.boxbe.com/anno?action=3Dremove&tc_serial=3D47652602796&tc_ra= nd=3D2077553940&utm_source=3Dstf&utm_medium=3Demail&utm_campaign=3DANNO_SEL= F&utm_content=3D001&key=3Dpfp9o0aprdql4jCeEcR8wp5d76lT0nDuooTwJ3X1HpQ%3D&to= ken=3Dt42fpyKw2nSmy2htq36aT2Z2J%2Fp7PtVo2GNwWs%2B%2BT7YGlF4iR1fuCrvnmVNr4vb= p >> ) >>=20 >> Hello all, I was talking to Evan about this, and we think it would be a >> good idea to read up on some of the old designs that led to the modern >> internet by reading the seminal works and highly cited papers. >>=20 >>=20 >> There's a couple I've read recently as part of a graduate networking >> course at UC Berkeley. These ones would be of interest to any person >> designing protocols or systems over internet infrastructure, which I >> believe is most of the ILP devs. >>=20 >>=20 >> *The Design Philosophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols >> * >> https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//darpa-intern= et.pdf >> =C2=A0 >>=20 >>=20 >> What's really fascinating about this one is that Clark acknowledges the >> internet would have been very different even if some of the second level >> goals been shifted around. >>=20 >>=20 >> The fundamental goal was interconnecting existing networks. Sounds >> familiar :) >>=20 >>=20 >> The second goal was availability despite loss of networks or gateways. >> This was after all funded by the department of defense. The next three >> goals focus on flexibility in terms of communication services, networks, >> and management of resources. The others include cost effectiveness, etc. >> There's loads of wisdom here we can discuss in further detail, would be >> curious to hear more about the initial designs when determining the >> various layers and how they would function. >>=20 >>=20 >> *END-TO-END ARGUMENTS IN SYSTEM DESIGN >> * >> https://people.eecs..berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//saltzer-e2e= .pdf >> ( >> https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//saltzer-e2e.= pdf >> ) >>=20 >>=20 >> I suggest reading this paper if you haven't before since it really set t= he >> foundation for why the internet is the way it is today. There are later >> papers in the course that I've read which summarize it well.=C2=A0 >>=20 >>=20 >> From " A Case for End System Multicast": >> " According to the end-to-end arguments, a functionality should be (i) >> pushed to higher layers if possible; unless (ii) implementing it at the >> lower layer can achieve large performance benefits that=C2=A0outweigh th= e cost >> of additional complexity at the lower layer. " >>=20 >>=20 >> This was in the case of routers, so depending how you look at your stack= , >> you can quite elegantly apply the argument for having dumb logic in the >> lower layers too.=C2=A0ILP lower layers are very different than what the >> internet had in the sense that it's all software based. And this goes fo= r >> pretty much every system today. The end to end argument is so pervasive >> that we've gone into recursively putting things at the ends whenever >> possible.=C2=A0 >>=20 >>=20 >> This design choice is responsible for the quick development of the >> internet because the endpoints were malleable compared to >> routers/middleware and rapid deployment is much easier that way. >>=20 >>=20 >> I like to use the analogy of Lightning vs Interledger for a lesson in >> complexity. Not just in terms of HTLCs:=C2=A0https://cyber.stanford.edu/= sites/default/files/htlcs_considered_harmful.pdf >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> But also in terms of weak interoperability/decentralized exchange suppor= t. >> I think there's some fundamental issues with such that once it's finishe= d >> for Bitcoin with all the bells and whistles (Neutrino, watchtowers, etc.= ), >> it is going to be a very stubborn protocol to deploy for more than just >> Bitcoin. I do like that there's a lightning plugin in progress for ILP t= o >> ensure interconnection between these network down the line.. ILP is goin= g >> to be a stubborn protocol to get rid of if it grows to be the connection >> network for a lot of payments. >>=20 >>=20 >> If we think about the fundamental goals here, Lightning obviously had ve= ry >> different ones than Interledger. But if the fundamental goal of IP was >> interconnect, then clearly Interledger is on to something here in terms = of >> future proofing. I'm curious to here what anyone thinks the fundamental >> goals were for either platform and perhaps formalizing them to further >> clarify the RFCs.=C2=A0 >>=20 >>=20 >> *Towards an Active Network Architecture >> * >> https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//active.pdf >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> This was a paper suggesting that it made sense to move more functionalit= y >> into the middleware, and have people pay for computation. Make routers n= ot >> just packet forwarders, but program executors and storage providers - >> basically servers that sound infra-structurally similar to many of the >> blockchain platforms we see.. Funnily enough, one of the biggest >> criticisms with this paper is authentication and billing, if you could >> solve it, you have feasibility. It's quite interesting to see a proposal >> this while Codius exists. This paper also was the inspiration for Softwa= re >> Defined Networking.=C2=A0 >>=20 >>=20 >> They're all coming from a class here if you're interested in following >> along, but I'll post what I think are valuable ones every now and then:= =C2=A0 >> https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/syllabus.html >>=20 >>=20 >> Hope that we can start an interesting discussion here! >>=20 >>=20 >> *Akash Khosla* >> Fourth Year EECS >> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > --c5847fdc1e8321538277ca770302d0988fd92ec50b530992de0547d74058 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 3D""
    One quote I like from The Design Philos= ophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols: "The goal of permitting distributed m= anagement of the Internet has certainly been met in certain aspects." certa= inly. "For example, not all of the gateways in the Internet are implemented= and managed by the same agency."

    In today's world= , we see a push for decentralization happening with all these new crypto pr= otocols pushing for sound, open money standards. But what degree of distrib= ution makes for a good monetary datagram protocol? And what does distributi= on mean in the case of Interledger and payment channel networks in general?= Should we shy away from these internet designs for money because they aren= 't decentralized enough? 

    From what I gather = after these reading papers and others (will post another email this week wi= th more readings) hub and spoke is the best way to speed up adoption/deploy= ment and I think makes the best balance between performant networks and end= -to-end arguments. Escaping this convergence requires a devolution of the m= onetary system because network-flow market-share needs to be measured by re= sources for security purposes, and only way to not have that is to be commu= nist, essentially.


    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS

    On Sun, Feb 3rd, 2019 at 1:55 PM, Per Lind <per.= lind@farmorcloud.asia> wrote:
    Hi Akash,

    I = agree wholeheartedly. 

    Best, 

    Per Lind=  
    Co-founder 
    Torid= ion Quantum Computing Lab 


    =
    On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, 22:52 AKASH KHOSLA, <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    Hello all, I was talking to Evan about this, and we think it would be = a good idea to read up on some of the old designs that led to the modern in= ternet by reading the seminal works and highly cited papers.

    =
    There's a couple I've read recently as part of a graduate networ= king course at UC Berkeley. These ones would be of interest to any person d= esigning protocols or systems over internet infrastructure, which I believe= is most of the ILP devs.

    The Design Philosophy of t= he DARPA Internet Protocols

    = What's really fascinating about this one is that Clark acknowledges the int= ernet would have been very different even if some of the second level goals= been shifted around.

    The fundamental goal was int= erconnecting existing networks. Sounds familiar :)

    The second goal was availability despite loss of networks or gateways. Thi= s was after all funded by the department of defense. The next three goals f= ocus on flexibility in terms of communication services, networks, and manag= ement of resources. The others include cost effectiveness, etc. There's loa= ds of wisdom here we can discuss in further detail, would be curious to hea= r more about the initial designs when determining the various layers and ho= w they would function.

    END-TO-END ARGUMENTS IN = SYSTEM DESIGN

    I suggest reading t= his paper if you haven't before since it really set the foundation for why = the internet is the way it is today. There are later papers in the course t= hat I've read which summarize it well. 

    Fr= om "A Case for End System Multicast= ":
    "According = to the end-to-end arguments, a functionality should be (i) pushed to higher layers if possible; unless (ii) implementing it at the lower layer can achieve large performance benefits that outweigh the cost of additional complexity at the lower layer."

    This was in the case of r= outers, so depending how you look at your stack, you can quite elegantly ap= ply the argument for having dumb logic in the lower layers too. ILP lower layers are very different than what the internet had in= the sense that it's all software based. And this goes for pretty much ever= y system today. The end to end argument is so pervasive that we've gone int= o recursively putting things at the ends whenever possible. 

    This design choice is responsible for the quick deve= lopment of the internet because the endpoints were malleable compared to ro= uters/middleware and rapid deployment is much easier that way.
    I like to use the analogy of Lightning vs Interledger for a le= sson in complexity. Not just in terms of HTLCs: https://cyber.stanford.edu/si= tes/default/files/htlcs_considered_harmful.pdf

    But also in terms of weak interoperability/decentralized exchange support.= I think there's some fundamental issues with such that once it's finished = for Bitcoin with all the bells and whistles (Neutrino, watchtowers, etc.), = it is going to be a very stubborn protocol to deploy for more than just Bit= coin. I do like that there's a lightning plugin in progress for ILP to ensu= re interconnection between these network down the line.. ILP is going to be= a stubborn protocol to get rid of if it grows to be the connection network= for a lot of payments.

    If we think about the fund= amental goals here, Lightning obviously had very different ones than Interl= edger. But if the fundamental goal of IP was interconnect, then clearly Int= erledger is on to something here in terms of future proofing. I'm curious t= o here what anyone thinks the fundamental goals were for either platform an= d perhaps formalizing them to further clarify the RFCs. 
    Towards an Active Network Architecture
    <= br>
    This was a paper suggesting that it made sense to move more f= unctionality into the middleware, and have people pay for computation. Make= routers not just packet forwarders, but program executors and storage prov= iders - basically servers that sound infra-structurally similar to many of = the blockchain platforms we see.. Funnily enough, one of the biggest critic= isms with this paper is authentication and billing, if you could solve it, = you have feasibility. It's quite interesting to see a proposal this while C= odius exists. This paper also was the inspiration for Software Defined Netw= orking. 

    They're all coming from a class here= if you're interested in following along, but I'll post what I think are va= luable ones every now and then: 
    https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-20= 19/syllabus.html

    =
    Hope that we can start an= interesting discussion here!
    3D""=
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS

    --c5847fdc1e8321538277ca770302d0988fd92ec50b530992de0547d74058-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 09:13:58 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 259BE124BAA for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 09:13:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.217 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.217 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AC_DIV_BONANZA=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ripple.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WbB5auhhB43I for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 09:13:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qt1-x844.google.com (mail-qt1-x844.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::844]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A921D130E8D for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 09:13:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x844.google.com with SMTP id u47so4669020qtj.6 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 09:13:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ripple.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version; bh=3uWXdh5oZWiN85XXCBsqT+1hHzPXSKfC6+RU9Kn2/CU=; b=SbCpjLUJg4c0InYQRhPjjTLjJWVJh0l/LcT9cj5Z67RwtXPK5BORTEfFkgik8g3V1p gpptqHiL+35J9kwhEdd5iEWfQgxcbMbjF314hDZcQkZx05U25q2YfxMGO099Ap907wcj HmIHEpi3QdWfpuqkSTPjp+bGMwDmaf9vtwj9k= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version; bh=3uWXdh5oZWiN85XXCBsqT+1hHzPXSKfC6+RU9Kn2/CU=; b=bEh/LHCg9Boq3z5pGzg/u9YKY1L9P3bGB3RceYftZh3O5x0fW9rvVFTiZw/InTwy5P 1M+44qtm2dSICZaCT7XrT1Kqh475Ehnr7g8nSsk669tdGVrQ+Go/Xvqe6lgYAxoNDtxh vsAaWo3hlo9pBZC6sYSlDDSwGm6wgtB7KVUAPH3MnjiZ0ZUz7LVMShsRTCpq+Y2yU44W 13ZTAxMRBftWoq3lvlYK6ul8IyLS5Jvywwnu/Ne8gbeEf56It35Y1wzTBcNRm5aKSSG5 hTGn0if2ELgy6H8xmUYqoX7APv9FwqUh8CFerB7ULm/KOyoSwWBWDGu8Uekz13xE3hUl mDWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAubqNaAH0xTRS3285XDJ8rmaYGSg5pIT1X0gCnr0UKp80Z6RjE3R ng545TXN0fDYP/fp0MoOZMOWVg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IaYxAHVZ/oLw83Ps5mM27zrVqO8u8nPwDW42twlYVSq9FZ+kxsVQ/Dy9TflNLAms3XU8Yy47A== X-Received: by 2002:aed:25f2:: with SMTP id y47mr4368613qtc.217.1549386830620; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 09:13:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from arch (inet-64-112-177-6.bos.netblazr.com. [64.112.177.6]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f143sm18433989qka.73.2019.02.05.09.13.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 09:13:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 09:13:47 -0800 From: Evan Schwartz To: AKASH KHOSLA Cc: Brian Kerr , David Fuelling , Bhaves Shah , Daniel Carroll , Yuriy Dybskiy , "=?utf-8?Q?ledger=40ietf.org?=" , "=?utf-8?Q?public-interledger=40w3.org?=" Message-ID: <1549386563.local-bddf6a40-4319-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> In-Reply-To: <5c59540bfe15d65c4a000008@polymail.io> References: <5c59540bfe15d65c4a000008@polymail.io> X-Mailer: Mailspring MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5c59c44b_7fdd1562_1bc0" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 17:13:56 -0000 --5c59c44b_7fdd1562_1bc0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I signed up for a trial Discourse account and submitted the request to have them host it for free because it's for an open source project. I'm waiting to hear back on that and working on getting the DNS set up to point forum.interledger.org to it (let me know if anyone feels strongly that the domain should be something else). If they don't approve the free hosting request, we can switch it over to a self-hosted version (and migrate the data). > Should we use bridging software? If anyone wants to use it, they would be more than welcome to set it up > Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on https://ethresear.ch/)? Possibly; what kind of rules would you envision? (Right now, though, I'm not too worried about having too much discussion. If that becomes a problem, I think we can cross that bridge when we get there) On Feb 5 2019, at 4:40 am, AKASH KHOSLA wrote: > > Based on the comments received and talking to people offline I think what's best going forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an asynchronous forum to replace email, and have the synchronous chat that replaces Gitter be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to avoid developer overhead. > > The only questions are now: > -What subdomain should the Discourse be at? forum.interledger.org? or disc.interledger.org or research.interledger.org? > -Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on https://ethresear.ch/)? I'm leaning more towards this, and I think that's the most effective way to use the platform while ensuring the Interledger community steers toward productive discussions. Early on, we can be lenient about this and enforce as needed. > -Should we use bridging software? (https://github.com/42wim/matterbridge) Note that this is not ideal, because moderation is fragmented, and the interoperability aspect basically relies on a bot receiving messages from another client and pushing it to a chat log. You can see the demos on matterbridge to see what I mean. > > -Assuming money not an issue, it looks like Slack is the preferred way to do things vs. Discord. Only downside is that Slack's interface for joining chats is not great (requires an auto-invite tool to be hosted), but I think that's ok, I've generally had better community experiences through Slack despite that. > > As long as we have a Discourse that stays with us forever with most of the valuable information, we can always move our synchronous chat if it ever becomes a problem. > > > Akash Khosla > Fourth Year EECS > akhosla@berkeley.edu (mailto:akhosla@berkeley.edu) > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz wrote: > > I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread. > > > > Sync > > Current: Gitter > > > > Use case: support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion > > > > Main problems: low response rate because a) there aren't enough contributors who are dedicating time to field issues (myself included) and b) few people have Gitter open all the time so checking for new messages is an extra step > > > > My take: Slack isn't great for open source projects but it is the one that most Interledger contributors have sitting open while they're working, so if we're optimizing for making sure people get help that might be the best one > > > > > > Async > > Current: Github Issues, Mailing List > > > > Use case: design discussion, brainstorming > > > > Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sending emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyone's inbox > > > > My take: Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of the Rust and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how different the participation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues and PRs. > > > > > > PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion! > > > > On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr wrote: > > > If we want to expand the community, I definitely would recommend switching to something that isn't forcing people to learn a new app. Adding the hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding and engagement. > > > > > > > > > I'd recommend slack or discord because most people already have the apps and are familiar with how to use them. > > > Brian Kerr > > > Co-founder > > > Kava.io > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling wrote: > > > > +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support > > > > https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice). > > > > > > > > Agree we need to move off of Gitter. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla wrote: > > > > > Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which regularly uses Gitter. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the projects at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. > > > > > > > > > > > > Http://Chat.hyperledger.org (http://Http://Chat.hyperledger.org) which is rocket chat. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID. Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool has to work within the larger community of Hyperledger. We have a unified standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org (http://wiki.hyperledger.org) > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > Silona > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll > > > > > > It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing of information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown information into categories and maintain a logical history. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah wrote: > > > > > > > > I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the community grows, although cost could be an issue later.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may want to check - https://flock.com/ > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > Bhaves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy wrote: > > > > > > > > > Akash, really great proposal! > > > > > > > > > I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that one. > > > > > > > > > Rocket.chat (http://rocket.chat/) is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of it so I'm +1 on that option as well :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat (http://rocket.chat/) is a better option. > > > > > > > > > Curious what others think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter to another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the lists. I think scaling the community requires something better than email and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple problems with Gitter: > > > > > > > > > > Clunky interface > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Poor separation of conversations/rooms > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad search function > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad mobile app > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev communities: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rocket.chat (https://rocket.chat/) > > > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > > > > > > Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with scripts > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Slack-like interface > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good search functionality > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Threads (https://github.com/RocketChat/Rocket.Chat/pull/11803#issuecomment-455963816) are being implemented > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Usable mobile applications > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actively maintained + marketplace integrations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (http://chat.interledger.org) (would be happy to help). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tell, but I expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain even more support than it already has. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discord > > > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > > > > > > Commonly used > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Free to use unlike sack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fast and friendly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Solid mobile apps > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actively maintained > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No self hosting or maintenance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Supports integrations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > May not be free forever > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chat logs are owned by Discord > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I describe it as heavier > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please chime in if you have a personal preference or have something to say about these platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives, you can generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what you like best. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Akash Khosla > > > > > > > > > > Fourth Year EECS > > > > > > > > > > akhosla@berkeley.edu (mailto:akhosla@berkeley.edu) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yuriy @html5cat (http://twitter.com/html5cat) Dybskiy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com (mailto:yuriy@dybskiy.com) > > > > > > > > > phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dybskiy.com (http://dybskiy.com) / Twitter (http://twitter.com/html5cat) / GitHub (http://github.com/html5cat) / Linkedin (http://ca.linkedin..com/in/dybskiy) > > > > > > > _._,_._,_ > > > > > > > Links: > > > > > > > You receive all messages sent to this group. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > View/Reply Online (#85) (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/message/85) | Reply To Sender (mailto:?subject=Private:%20Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else) | Reply To Group (mailto:quilt@lists.hyperledger.org?subject=Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else) | Mute This Topic (https://lists.hyperledger.org/mt/29637867/1540173) | New Topic (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post) > > > > > > > Your Subscription (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/editsub/1540173) | Contact Group Owner (mailto:quilt+owner@lists.hyperledger.org) | Unsubscribe (https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/unsub) [sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org (mailto:sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org)] > > > > > > > _._,_._,_ --5c59c44b_7fdd1562_1bc0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
    I signed up for a trial Discourse account and submitted the request = to have them host it for free because it's for an open source project. I'= m waiting to hear back on that and working on getting the DNS set up to p= oint forum.interledger.org to it (let me know if anyone feels strong= ly that the domain should be something else). If they don't approve the f= ree hosting request, we can switch it over to a self-hosted version (and = migrate the data).

    > Should we u= se bridging software=3F

    If anyone wants to us= e it, they would be more than welcome to set it up

    > Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearl= y defined rules for discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio = (like on <= font style=3D=22font-family:-apple-system, system-ui, "segoe ui"= ;, roboto, oxygen, ubuntu, cantarell, "fira sans", "droid = sans", "helvetica neue", sans-serif=22>https://ethresear.= ch/)=3F

    =
    Possibly; what kind of rules would you envision=3F (Right now, thoug= h, I'm not too worried about having too much discussion. If that becomes = a problem, I think we can cross that bridge when we get there)

    <= div class=3D=22gmail=5Fquote=5Fattribution=22>On =46eb 5 2019, at 4:40 am= , AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla=40berkeley.edu> wrote:
    3D=22=22
    Based on the comments received and talking to people offline I thin= k what's best going forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an as= ynchronous forum to replace email, and have the synchronous chat that rep= laces Gitter be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to avoid= developer overhead.

    The only questions are now:
    -What subdo= main should the Discourse be at=3F forum.interledger.org=3F or = disc.interledger.org or research.interledger.org=3F 
    -Does it make se= nse for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for discussions for = enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on https://ethresear.ch/)=3F I'm leaning more = towards this, and I think that's the most effective way to use the platfo= rm while ensuring the Interledger community steers toward productive disc= ussions. Early on, we can be lenient about this and enforce as needed.&nb= sp;
    -Should we use bridging software=3F  (ht= tps://github.com/42wim/matterbridge) Note that this is not ideal, because modera= tion is fragmented, and the interoperability aspect basically relies on a= bot receiving messages from another client and pushing it to a chat log.= You can see the demos on matterbridge to see what I mean. 
    -As= suming money not an issue, it looks like Slack is the preferred way to do= things vs. Discord. Only downside is that Slack's interface for joining = chats is not great (requires an auto-invite tool to be hosted), but I thi= nk that's ok, I've generally had better community experiences through Sla= ck despite that.

    As long as we have a Discourse that stays = with us forever with most of the valuable information, we can always move= our synchronous chat if it ever becomes a problem.
    <= /tbody>
    3D=22=22
    Akash Khosla
    =46ourth Year EECS

    On Mon, =46= eb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz <evan=40ripple.com> wrote:
    I like the idea of categorizing the option= s into synchronous and asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in= that Rust thread.

    Sync
    • Current: Gitter
    • Use case: support and, to a lesser extent, design discu= ssion
    • Main problems: low response rate because a) ther= e aren't enough contributors who are dedicating time to field issues (mys= elf included) and b) few people have Gitter open all the time so checking= for new messages is an extra step
    • My take: Slack isn'= t great for open source projects but it is the one that most Interledger = contributors have sitting open while they're working, so if we're optimiz= ing for making sure people get help that might be the best one
      • =
    Async
    • Current: Github Issues, Mailing List
    • Use case: design discussion, brainstorming
      • Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sen= ding emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyo= ne's inbox
    • My take: Discourse might be worth trying ou= t, based on the experience of the Rust and Ethereum Research communities,= but I'm not sure how different the participation would be on that type o= f forum versus on Github issues and PRs.
    PS Thanks Ak= ash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion=21

    On =46eb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr <brian=40kava.io> wrote:

    Brian Kerr
    Co-founde= r
    Kava.io



    +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would suppo= rt 
    https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and c= hat use that and it seems nice).

    Agree we need t= o move off of Gitter.

    On Mon, =46= eb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla <akhosla=40berkele= y.edu> wrote:
    Gotcha, in that case I'l= l move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused o= n the Interledger working group which regularly uses Gitter.

    On Mon, =46eb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald <sbonewald=40linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

    On Sun, =46eb 3, 2019,= 23:25 Daniel Carroll <daniel.carroll=40secureblockchains.com wrote:
    It would likely be good to have a couple of different platform= s. 

    I like Discord and Telegram for communi= ty chat and general sharing of information. But both are limited in how y= ou can breakdown information into categories and maintain a logical histo= ry. 

    I like Slack and Trello for grouping c= hunks of data within a team attempting productivity. 

    =
    Dan

    On =46eb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Sh= ah <bhaves.shah=40jabjabgroup.com&g= t; wrote:

    I assume when lo= oking at the community at large we want a solution that is seccure in nat= ure and also has the feature set to grow as the community grows, although= cost could be an issue later..

    You may wan= t to check -  https://flock.com/

    Cheers=21
    Bhaves

    On 4 =46eb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dy= bskiy <yuriy=40dybskiy.com> wrote:

    Akash, really great proposal=21
    I've been using Discord more a= nd more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that one. 
    <= div>Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I u= sed to be a huge fan of it so I'm +1 on that option as well :)

    Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight prefer= ence there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option.
    Curious what others think.

    On Sat, =46eb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla=40berkeley.edu> wrote:
    Hi all,

    I was wondering if there wo= uld be any interest in moving from Gitter to another platform. The main r= eason I bring this up is because Gitter could be out of the way for a lot= of us and the application doesn't encourage dedicated usage. Email lists= are a bit old school and signing up for the Interledger one is out of th= e way. I think the reason for such a cryptic interface for the w3c style/= linux foundation emails list is sybil resistance and anti-spam since ther= e are liberal write permissions to the lists. I think scaling the communi= ty requires something better than email and Gitter. Would be great to hea= r thoughts on this.

    Couple problems with G= itter:
    1. Clunky interface
    2. Poor se= paration of conversations/rooms
    3. Bad search function
    4. Bad mobile app

    = Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev co= mmunities:

    =
    Pros:
    1. Open source chat (basically a friendly = IRC replacement)
    2. Self hosting is free, cloud options a= vailable, easy to deploy with scripts
    3. Slack-like inter= face
    4. Good search functionality
    5. Threads are being implemented
    6. Usable mobile applications
    7. Actively ma= intained + marketplace integrations
    8. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would be happy to help).
      9. Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter.
    Con= s:
    1. Not as well known as discord, slack or gi= tter from what I can tell, but I expect it to continue to grow in usage d= own the line and gain even more support than it already has.

    Discord
    Pros:
    1. Commonly used
    2. =46ree to use unlike= sack
    3. =46ast and friendly
    4. Solid mob= ile apps
    5. Actively maintained
    6. No sel= f hosting or maintenance
    7. Supports integrations
    Cons:
    1. May not be free forever
    2. Chat logs are owned by Discord
    3. More = complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I describe it as= heavier

    This list may not be co= mplete in terms of pros and cons so please chime in if you have a persona= l preference or have something to say about these platforms or others. I'= ve spent some time with both alternatives, you can generally find demos o= n their corresponding websites to see what you like best.

    <= /div>
    3D=22=22
    Akash Khosla
    = =46ourth Year EECS
    <= /div>


    --
    Best regards,
    Yuriy =40html5cat Dybskiy

    phone: +1 (650) 434-2004
    <= /div>
    =
    =5F.=5F,=5F.=5F,=5F
    Links:
    You = receive all messages sent to this group.


    =5F.=5F,=5F.=5F,=5F
    =
    --5c59c44b_7fdd1562_1bc0-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 11:09:39 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E26A124BE5 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 11:09:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopebailie.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zo9ZyuFtblV9 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 11:09:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-x32d.google.com (mail-ot1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1A381276D0 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 11:09:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id 81so7694407otj.2 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 11:09:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopebailie.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=BgRvnI2Vcs1rZVRKUws9ok6v5U9ggx/1bLc9wbj+v3Y=; b=UhUnRwXLaCpSuYNuG7DTcfTupX+ZIUZnj9+7EZDZmj+qs0Y8XKvmKIw/307R6iW18V /TdS3lqlvq8uMj02gd29DDBKuKUFs8bmUfKDVnIgNVD+Jfcvtt1ERbusHbhthonP7EMN HQrWYfH4S5wh842azv4tl129iWw8QuAxJ4KAE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=BgRvnI2Vcs1rZVRKUws9ok6v5U9ggx/1bLc9wbj+v3Y=; b=hwJpCA8mx2rtUtEr2nijd76aegC/MgUFPX/Dn3IvFlon1PWWt72HicT6qsCbBkTADZ +CKTSO+f19dKHyryZ861oTSCLkXPPQ+/tDU90vbt3n+4dvLq5LsPSs+gwBBZH+AB1KXi hXoqMMAJK0qcCzT43bLXkfroak1GTmY4rQeuV5oKL3cGBVLLaHb1nHv8C6gy+KKTY1Np bid5FCLi9dMZTDlfbkOwraKbQIHVRwdamjUO15+wyeKrJb3YN+yVeNmKK7nPtCKXfgKh dnIela+WmYyzPZJkDuEke7js5LZVFphj3MNvtLn53cEhuxK15dlDGu7VwzPCipviIxR/ h99g== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAubFrAnP5wRwLbBeJaNmiefunk6bwIGme688AoGkX+2UydUXS44B KL/e2PNitc/hLA0Atwi7nVQFoR3fJwVN5omlkFXD8Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZ1oXSiMfGIirAe6RnWAefjviuL3HPiJDus7uWHvZ/UOIQ+rVLzV9HVwe85HLKals0MPru+xtZ9bsJO5X23KYo= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:61c8:: with SMTP id h8mr3288520otk.279.1549393774157; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 11:09:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Adrian Hope-Bailie Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 21:09:21 +0200 Message-ID: To: Interledger Community Group , Interledger Mailing List - IETF , Hyperledger Quilt Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000086b88505812a590f" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] AGENDA - - Interledger Call - 6 February - 3pm UTC X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 19:09:38 -0000 --00000000000086b88505812a590f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There has been a request to also discuss pull payments on the call tomorrow so we'll add it to the agenda. A lot of discussion already on this PR: https://github.com/interledger/rfcs/pull/501 On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 21:15, Adrian Hope-Bailie wrote: > Hi all, > > Two topics for this week including: > > - A presentation from Steven Zeiler and Anypay on what they're doing wit= h > ILP. > - A discussion about Interledger and Decentralised Exchanges from a > conversation that started on Gitter. If anyone is up for leading this top= ic > please let me know or just reply to this mail. > > Note that all the recent calls are available to listen to from the websit= e: > https://interledger.org/calls.html > > Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/s/377506344 > > > Or iPhone one-tap: > US: +14086380968,,377506344# or +16468769923,,377506344# > > Or Telephone: > Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current > location): > US: +1 408 638 0968 <+1%20408%20638%200968> or +1 646 876 9923 > <+1%20646%20876%209923> or +1 669 900 6833 <+1%20669%20900%206833> > Meeting ID: 377 506 344 > International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/cbrUAzE3W > > --00000000000086b88505812a590f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    There has been a request to also discuss = pull payments on the call tomorrow so we'll add it to the agenda.
    A= lot of discussion already on this PR:=C2=A0https://github.com/interledger/rfcs/pull/501<= /div>

    On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 21:15, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote:
    =
    Hi all,

    Two topics for this week including:

    =C2=A0- A presentation from Steven Zeiler and Anypay = on what they're doing with ILP.
    =C2=A0- A discussion about Interled= ger and Decentralised Exchanges from a conversation that started on Gitter.= If anyone is up for leading this topic please let me know or just reply to= this mail.

    Note that all the recent calls are ava= ilable to listen to from the website:


    Or iPhone one-tap:
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0US: +14086380968,,377506344= # or +16468769923,,377506344#

    Or Telephone:
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Dial(for higher qual= ity, dial a number based on your current location):=C2=A0
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0US:= =C2=A0+1 408 638 0968= =C2=A0or=C2=A0= +1 646 876 9923=C2=A0or=C2=A0+1 669 900 6833=C2=A0<= /font>
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0Meeting ID: 377 506 344
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0International numbers avai= lable:=C2=A0https://zoom.us/u/cbrUAzE3W
    --00000000000086b88505812a590f-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 13:11:53 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E921312A9 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 13:11:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.988 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.988 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopebailie.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a-b_serqL11n for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 13:11:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-x344.google.com (mail-ot1-x344.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::344]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D891130DE7 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 13:11:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-x344.google.com with SMTP id u16so8282631otk.8 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 13:11:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopebailie.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KoPZqI6agL4RJn5ITYOrEvXtDpqBVQ3jujtAX/ScIpw=; b=BQyRYynKSBi7P+XQ9tBonmXX34/ZOc+3wzdf3BOB9CZNGaSuznwfYWLqcq9L/mgPc4 DXzln2RMTI/Cdw/JUGtmC+PBHtrhwe4qy1J5bQEAy1IohY8NBIplnySgYBKmdjJa//UG xKKFHkMe8XX3PKzlmLVl2JD/WfjL8lSdcOTlc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KoPZqI6agL4RJn5ITYOrEvXtDpqBVQ3jujtAX/ScIpw=; b=NfSAXtW6KH0Qo5GFvsy+ToBpAbGOqBptWOG2iu5H2lwa3YZSVqqiqyqD4DWyDD6jr7 xypwpS2WBmxTCBJkEZ0KViLGu7/z2T1lC4p3MEiZ046B0ti+Jzv3tOBFY3X825AEpXpX Tab2f21hbdNVd2nGjktSZ3OUryAWWP1a9YWZOGSbwptcvf9I4SjYXuSLdoklztMZT2Mv RHTRQO8rAIIcuRscQFuOLRgjzCypIVcbZ9DRo6ZkQkA82RIQVG0wGD+K4OnO2v/u9SuS LwGWm4S1iIkzwCmsDyVoEthVOOGQf1+6i05bSjF5PuA7aV0hfoKAUuOoSa2YKC+e/yRP zZLA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuY5GKWIl6+qEvDcZQYIqP+zo/1zF1BXkZoDEyo1fWIiQKkDpaSH W6LTIxHXlwG2RCxSzNcZc+Dzxhw28lV+fs5KtDrbpg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZfSdQ1gHih53r/e7lMTmhBlzPQji0lNsRtt0hH9CNDdo3X+NncSMlR6F1t/dp1ecX/1LahmEPOtYGcCBAxxvE= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5e8c:: with SMTP id f12mr3966726otl.343.1549401107624; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 13:11:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5c596dbebf32932a88000009@polymail.io> In-Reply-To: <5c596dbebf32932a88000009@polymail.io> From: Adrian Hope-Bailie Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 23:11:34 +0200 Message-ID: To: AKASH KHOSLA Cc: Per Lind , Interledger Community Group , Hyperledger Quilt Mailing List , Interledger Mailing List - IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a289fb05812c0ebc" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] Reading the old design papers of the internet X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 21:11:52 -0000 --000000000000a289fb05812c0ebc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A huge advantage to federated topologies or hub and spoke is that by having pools of capital you can more effectively net flows against one another. If the topology is truly decentralised this is very inefficient. The result is that the network locks up more capital. On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 17:29, AKASH KHOSLA wrote: > One quote I like from The Design Philosophy of the DARPA Internet > Protocols: "The goal of permitting distributed management of the Internet > has certainly been met in certain aspects." certainly. "For example, not > all of the gateways in the Internet are implemented and managed by the sa= me > agency." > > In today's world, we see a push for decentralization happening with all > these new crypto protocols pushing for sound, open money standards. But > what degree of distribution makes for a good monetary datagram protocol? > And what does distribution mean in the case of Interledger and payment > channel networks in general? Should we shy away from these internet desig= ns > for money because they aren't decentralized enough? > > From what I gather after these reading papers and others (will post > another email this week with more readings) hub and spoke is the best way > to speed up adoption/deployment and I think makes the best balance betwee= n > performant networks and end-to-end arguments. Escaping this convergence > requires a devolution of the monetary system because network-flow > market-share needs to be measured by resources for security purposes, and > only way to not have that is to be communist, essentially. > > > *Akash Khosla* > Fourth Year EECS > akhosla@berkeley.edu > > On Sun, Feb 3rd, 2019 at 1:55 PM, Per Lind > wrote: > >> Hi Akash, >> >> I agree wholeheartedly. >> >> Best, >> >> Per Lind >> Co-founder >> Toridion Quantum Computing Lab >> >> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, 22:52 AKASH KHOSLA, wrote: >> >> [image: Boxbe] AKASH KHOSLA ( >> akhosla@berkeley.edu) is on your Guest List >> >> | Delete this guest >> >> Hello all, I was talking to Evan about this, and we think it would be a >> good idea to read up on some of the old designs that led to the modern >> internet by reading the seminal works and highly cited papers. >> >> There's a couple I've read recently as part of a graduate networking >> course at UC Berkeley. These ones would be of interest to any person >> designing protocols or systems over internet infrastructure, which I >> believe is most of the ILP devs. >> >> >> *The Design Philosophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols* >> >> https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//darpa-intern= et.pdf >> >> >> What's really fascinating about this one is that Clark acknowledges the >> internet would have been very different even if some of the second level >> goals been shifted around. >> >> The fundamental goal was interconnecting existing networks. Sounds >> familiar :) >> >> The second goal was availability despite loss of networks or gateways. >> This was after all funded by the department of defense. The next three >> goals focus on flexibility in terms of communication services, networks, >> and management of resources. The others include cost effectiveness, etc. >> There's loads of wisdom here we can discuss in further detail, would be >> curious to hear more about the initial designs when determining the vari= ous >> layers and how they would function. >> >> >> *END-TO-END ARGUMENTS IN SYSTEM DESIGN* >> >> https://people.eecs..berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//saltzer-e2e= .pdf >> >> >> I suggest reading this paper if you haven't before since it really set >> the foundation for why the internet is the way it is today. There are la= ter >> papers in the course that I've read which summarize it well. >> >> *From "A Case for End System Multicast":* >> "According to the end-to-end arguments, a functionality should be (i) >> pushed to higher layers if possible; unless (ii) implementing it at the >> lower layer can achieve large performance benefits that outweigh the >> cost of additional complexity at the lower layer." >> >> This was in the case of routers, so depending how you look at your stack= , >> you can quite elegantly apply the argument for having dumb logic in the >> lower layers too. ILP lower layers are very different than what the >> internet had in the sense that it's all software based. And this goes fo= r >> pretty much every system today. The end to end argument is so pervasive >> that we've gone into recursively putting things at the ends whenever >> possible. >> >> This design choice is responsible for the quick development of the >> internet because the endpoints were malleable compared to >> routers/middleware and rapid deployment is much easier that way. >> >> I like to use the analogy of Lightning vs Interledger for a lesson in >> complexity. Not just in terms of HTLCs: >> https://cyber.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/htlcs_considered_harmful.= pdf >> >> But also in terms of weak interoperability/decentralized exchange >> support. I think there's some fundamental issues with such that once it'= s >> finished for Bitcoin with all the bells and whistles (Neutrino, >> watchtowers, etc.), it is going to be a very stubborn protocol to deploy >> for more than just Bitcoin. I do like that there's a lightning plugin in >> progress for ILP to ensure interconnection between these network down th= e >> line.. ILP is going to be a stubborn protocol to get rid of if it grows = to >> be the connection network for a lot of payments. >> >> If we think about the fundamental goals here, Lightning obviously had >> very different ones than Interledger. But if the fundamental goal of IP = was >> interconnect, then clearly Interledger is on to something here in terms = of >> future proofing. I'm curious to here what anyone thinks the fundamental >> goals were for either platform and perhaps formalizing them to further >> clarify the RFCs. >> >> >> *Towards an Active Network Architecture* >> https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/papers//active.pdf >> >> This was a paper suggesting that it made sense to move more functionalit= y >> into the middleware, and have people pay for computation. Make routers n= ot >> just packet forwarders, but program executors and storage providers - >> basically servers that sound infra-structurally similar to many of the >> blockchain platforms we see.. Funnily enough, one of the biggest critici= sms >> with this paper is authentication and billing, if you could solve it, yo= u >> have feasibility. It's quite interesting to see a proposal this while >> Codius exists. This paper also was the inspiration for Software Defined >> Networking. >> >> They're all coming from a class here if you're interested in following >> along, but I'll post what I think are valuable ones every now and then: >> https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/syllabus.html >> >> Hope that we can start an interesting discussion here! >> *Akash Khosla* >> Fourth Year EECS >> akhosla@berkeley.edu >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Ledger mailing list > Ledger@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ledger > --000000000000a289fb05812c0ebc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    A huge advantage to federated topologies or hub and spoke = is that by having pools of capital you can more effectively net flows again= st one another.

    If the topology is truly decentralised t= his is very inefficient. The result is that the network locks up more capit= al.

    On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 17:29, AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    3D""<= div>One quote I like from The Design Philosophy of the DARPA Internet Proto= cols: "The goal of permitting distributed management of the Internet h= as certainly been met in certain aspects." certainly. "For exampl= e, not all of the gateways in the Internet are implemented and managed by t= he same agency."

    In today's world, we see= a push for decentralization happening with all these new crypto protocols = pushing for sound, open money standards. But what degree of distribution ma= kes for a good monetary datagram protocol? And what does distribution mean = in the case of Interledger and payment channel networks in general? Should = we shy away from these internet designs for money because they aren't d= ecentralized enough?=C2=A0

    From what I gather afte= r these reading papers and others (will post another email this week with m= ore readings) hub and spoke is the best way to speed up adoption/deployment= and I think makes the best balance between performant networks and end-to-= end arguments. Escaping this convergence requires a devolution of the monet= ary system because network-flow market-share needs to be measured by resour= ces for security purposes, and only way to not have that is to be communist= , essentially.


    =
    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Four= th Year EECS

    On Sun, Feb 3rd, 2019 at 1:55 PM, Pe= r Lind <p= er.lind@farmorcloud.asia> wrote:
    Hi Akash,

    I = agree wholeheartedly.=C2=A0

    Best,=C2=A0

    Per Lind= =C2=A0
    Co-founder=C2=A0
    Torid= ion Quantum Computing Lab=C2=A0


    =
    <= /div>
    On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, 22:52 AKASH KHOSLA, &= lt;akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    Hello all, I was talking to Evan about this, and we think it would be = a good idea to read up on some of the old designs that led to the modern in= ternet by reading the seminal works and highly cited papers.

    =
    There's a couple I've read recently as part of a graduat= e networking course at UC Berkeley. These ones would be of interest to any = person designing protocols or systems over internet infrastructure, which I= believe is most of the ILP devs.

    The Design Philoso= phy of the DARPA Internet Protocols

    What's really fascinating about this one is that Clark acknowle= dges the internet would have been very different even if some of the second= level goals been shifted around.

    The fundamental = goal was interconnecting existing networks. Sounds familiar :)
    The second goal was availability despite loss of networks or g= ateways. This was after all funded by the department of defense. The next t= hree goals focus on flexibility in terms of communication services, network= s, and management of resources. The others include cost effectiveness, etc.= There's loads of wisdom here we can discuss in further detail, would b= e curious to hear more about the initial designs when determining the vario= us layers and how they would function.

    END-TO-E= ND ARGUMENTS IN SYSTEM DESIGN

    I s= uggest reading this paper if you haven't before since it really set the= foundation for why the internet is the way it is today. There are later pa= pers in the course that I've read which summarize it well.=C2=A0
    <= div>
    From "A = Case for End System Multicast":
    "According to the end-to-end arguments, a functionality should be (i) pushed to higher layers if possible; unless (ii) implementing it at the lower layer can achieve large performance benefits that=C2=A0outweigh the cost of additional complexity at the lower layer."

    This was in the case= of routers, so depending how you look at your stack, you can quite elegant= ly apply the argument for having dumb logic in the lower layers too.=C2=A0<= span style=3D"font-family:-apple-system,system-ui,"segoe ui",robo= to,oxygen,ubuntu,cantarell,"fira sans","droid sans",&qu= ot;helvetica neue",sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-va= riant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-s= pacing:normal">ILP lower layers are very different than what the internet h= ad in the sense that it's all software based. And this goes for pretty = much every system today. The end to end argument is so pervasive that we= 9;ve gone into recursively putting things at the ends whenever possible.=C2= =A0

    This design choice is responsible for t= he quick development of the internet because the endpoints were malleable c= ompared to routers/middleware and rapid deployment is much easier that way.=

    I like to use the analogy of Lightning vs Interle= dger for a lesson in complexity. Not just in terms of HTLCs:=C2=A0https://cyber.= stanford.edu/sites/default/files/htlcs_considered_harmful.pdf

    But also in terms of weak interoperability/decentralized ex= change support. I think there's some fundamental issues with such that = once it's finished for Bitcoin with all the bells and whistles (Neutrin= o, watchtowers, etc.), it is going to be a very stubborn protocol to deploy= for more than just Bitcoin. I do like that there's a lightning plugin = in progress for ILP to ensure interconnection between these network down th= e line.. ILP is going to be a stubborn protocol to get rid of if it grows t= o be the connection network for a lot of payments.

    If we think about the fundamental goals here, Lightning obviously had very= different ones than Interledger. But if the fundamental goal of IP was int= erconnect, then clearly Interledger is on to something here in terms of fut= ure proofing. I'm curious to here what anyone thinks the fundamental go= als were for either platform and perhaps formalizing them to further clarif= y the RFCs.=C2=A0

    Towards an Active Network Arc= hitecture

    This was a paper suggesting th= at it made sense to move more functionality into the middleware, and have p= eople pay for computation. Make routers not just packet forwarders, but pro= gram executors and storage providers - basically servers that sound infra-s= tructurally similar to many of the blockchain platforms we see.. Funnily en= ough, one of the biggest criticisms with this paper is authentication and b= illing, if you could solve it, you have feasibility. It's quite interes= ting to see a proposal this while Codius exists. This paper also was the in= spiration for Software Defined Networking.=C2=A0

    T= hey're all coming from a class here if you're interested in followi= ng along, but I'll post what I think are valuable ones every now and th= en:=C2=A0
    ht= tps://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~sylvia/cs268-2019/syllabus.html

    Hope that we can start an interesting discussion here= !
    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Ye= ar EECS

    _________________________________= ______________
    Ledger mailing list
    Ledger@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ledger
    --000000000000a289fb05812c0ebc-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 14:02:42 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD6B2131306 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 14:02:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.039 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.039 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AC_DIV_BONANZA=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cyzvg_fGOGls for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 14:02:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it1-x142.google.com (mail-it1-x142.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B597131303 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 14:02:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x142.google.com with SMTP id w18so1522025ite.1 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 14:02:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:message-id:from:to:cc:subject :date; bh=4G8EN6yl1XNWV1ipkrM024uVRM5r3N1/TXr6EEktMuU=; b=lit2CZJpA02rHOjiFk2qEMWlCPM7ItDiK9iH2GuNsGBksSuYX7sfotS5vCACSTpi7M JAnpg/9piDvVcYthFtnHPcb53jajV/58q0P63JlxHwXZdhdjRRh1UL79XRHUQALthezW U6JOpTO2lGsvlFOTcqOhhEvuVBzCsFpPXS+TWdp97twljwfgB+6RC0aAV11OsoBT/lJS SeuQVRh1owvMKoJ3VwN280QTA/HPl/hk1PaHQRcQHWXBL4dSIYNwZo5f1TF+686meNVM Ke0kwah+wRYPqHdk7id/WCzaeVhPUf/27Tf1N7kFxQHcw4Wu6UPOZwkkScg9hXkmF3zg zuCw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=4G8EN6yl1XNWV1ipkrM024uVRM5r3N1/TXr6EEktMuU=; b=BqB1mwmD2S1MTIolJexoQZRvtCED8sV9u4+IGkQQcBAiDtogsXGuJsLFyxv0kKVSNy Ae2/hrbzwWHoqW0GdUAzHT9EbeUzjvlQegr8AX7IULMveECQAUzdigK6prqYYek0jtgC YWwCErmkJ949zkgiNrQSshwuqygl6IYduOQTKm8+NAK5XccYhGV658O4njH9cDug8mzb p2KzrvFaMfdeq/Kblprj/jEiFY8t6mLrXVwVf4RSXMQhkaXmYAuMMs21WfHVaF1ShZia bSPPttGgTm9WOfyTWxhiTKYox5jITffReUNfAhZOpyJKaArI1HVdLlZrqZwe21rWKJ5K W4bg== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZwWVo9/kshae9H7qJGsktiCEl53630nP+/wf0BixAszD0Irn6C SK56YjLyiYgvoNiPrKkCO52ClRiRjSbodw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IafOycJhyYiHS6Bo536NyRh3XBTXGKff8vju7NS5D3jk6j1X6Qej514Bv1uA6NCJe3CxAn62g== X-Received: by 2002:a02:3741:: with SMTP id r62mr3908393jar.71.1549404153026; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 14:02:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (137.175.238.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.238.175.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l186sm2387593itl.22.2019.02.05.14.02.32 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 14:02:32 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1549386563.local-bddf6a40-4319-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> References: <1549386563.local-bddf6a40-4319-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> X-Mailer: Polymail Message-ID: <5c5a02c055f7b128c9000002@polymail.io> From: "AKASH KHOSLA" To: "Evan Schwartz" Cc: "Brian Kerr" , "David Fuelling" , "Bhaves Shah" , "Daniel Carroll" , "Yuriy Dybskiy" , "ledger@ietf.org" , "public-interledger@w3.org" X-Polymail-Id: <5c5a02c055f7b128c9000002@polymail.io> Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 14:02:16 -0800 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=dc9b8763413eb5b56b01d7cbeff87ca085e9e2c47c28b3109d0e90ce5422 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 22:02:40 -0000 --dc9b8763413eb5b56b01d7cbeff87ca085e9e2c47c28b3109d0e90ce5422 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 This a public forum for participating in Interledger's research efforts, in= cluding but not limited to: * Scaling * Load balancing * Connector topology * Routing * Decentralized Exchange * Market Making * Fee Markets * Economics * Privacy techniques * Custody * ILP improvements (pre-RFC) This is=C2=A0*not*=C2=A0the place for: * Generic crypto and Interledger discussion (use Slack) * Discussing specific PRs and in progress RFCs (use GitHub) Technical questions are ok as long as they are relevant and are non-repeats= . Just don't want to have randos asking about when the next ILP plug-in is go= ing to be released on here or "when wallet". *Akash Khosla* Fourth Year EECS akhosla@berkeley.edu On Tue, Feb 5th, 2019 at 9:13 AM, Evan Schwartz wrote: >=20 > I signed up for a trial Discourse account and submitted the request to > have them host it for free because it's for an open source project. I'm > waiting to hear back on that and working on getting the DNS set up to > point forum.interledger.org ( http://forum.interledger.org ) to it (let m= e > know if anyone feels strongly that the domain should be something else). > If they don't approve the free hosting request, we can switch it over to = a > self-hosted version (and migrate the data). >=20 > > Should we use bridging software? >=20 > If anyone wants to use it, they would be more than welcome to set it up >=20 > > Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for > discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on=C2=A0https:= //ethresear.ch/ > )? >=20 > Possibly; what kind of rules would you envision? (Right now, though, I'm > not too worried about having too much discussion. If that becomes a > problem, I think we can cross that bridge when we get there) >=20 >=20 > On Feb 5 2019, at 4:40 am, AKASH KHOSLA < akhosla@berkeley.edu > wrote: >=20 >>=20 >> Based on the comments received and talking to people offline I think >> what's best going forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an >> asynchronous forum to replace email, and have the synchronous chat that >> replaces Gitter be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to >> avoid developer overhead. >>=20 >>=20 >> The only questions are now: >> -What subdomain should the Discourse be at?=C2=A0forum.interledger.org? = or >> disc.interledger.org or research.interledger.org?=C2=A0 >> -Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for >> discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on=C2=A0https= ://ethresear.ch/ >> )? I'm leaning more towards this, and I think that's the most effective >> way to use the platform while ensuring the Interledger community steers >> toward productive discussions. Early on, we can be lenient about this an= d >> enforce as needed.=C2=A0 >> -Should we use bridging software?=C2=A0=C2=A0( https://github.com/42wim/= matterbridge >> ) Note that this is not ideal, because moderation is fragmented, and the >> interoperability aspect basically relies on a bot receiving messages fro= m >> another client and pushing it to a chat log. You can see the demos on >> matterbridge to see what I mean.=C2=A0 >> -Assuming money not an issue, it looks like Slack is the preferred way t= o >> do things vs. Discord. Only downside is that Slack's interface for joini= ng >> chats is not great (requires an auto-invite tool to be hosted), but I >> think that's ok, I've generally had better community experiences through >> Slack despite that. >>=20 >>=20 >> As long as we have a Discourse that stays with us forever with most of t= he >> valuable information, we can always move our synchronous chat if it ever >> becomes a problem. >>=20 >>=20 >> *Akash Khosla* >> Fourth Year EECS >> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz < evan@ripple.com > wrote= : >>=20 >>> I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and >>> asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread. >>>=20 >>> Sync >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> Current: Gitter >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> Use case: support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> Main problems: low response rate because a) there aren't enough >>> contributors who are dedicating time to field issues (myself included) = and >>> b) few people have Gitter open all the time so checking for new message= s >>> is an extra step >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> My take: Slack isn't great for open source projects but it is the one t= hat >>> most Interledger contributors have sitting open while they're working, = so >>> if we're optimizing for making sure people get help that might be the b= est >>> one >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Async >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> Current: Github Issues, Mailing List >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> Use case: design discussion, brainstorming >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sending >>> emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyone'= s >>> inbox >>>=20 >>> *=20 >>> My take: Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience o= f >>> the Rust and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how differ= ent >>> the participation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issue= s >>> and PRs. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion! >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr < brian@kava.io > wrote: >>>=20 >>>> If we want to expand the community, I definitely would recommend switc= hing >>>> to something that isn't forcing people to learn a new app.=C2=A0 Addin= g the >>>> hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding and engagement.=C2=A0 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> I'd recommend slack or discord because most people already have the ap= ps >>>> and are familiar with how to use them.=C2=A0 >>>>=20 >>>> Brian Kerr >>>> Co-founder >>>> Kava.io >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling < fuelling@ripple.com = > >>>> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support=C2=A0 >>>>> https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems ni= ce). >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Agree we need to move off of Gitter. >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla < akhosla@berkeley.edu > = wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>> Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid >>>>>> confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which >>>>>> regularly uses Gitter. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald < sbonewald@linuxfoun= dation.org >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here=C2=A0 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the pr= ojects >>>>>>> at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Http://Chat.hyperledger.org ( http://Http://Chat.hyperledger.org ) = which is >>>>>>> rocket chat.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A Li= nux >>>>>>> foundation ID.=C2=A0 Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux = foundation >>>>>>> and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool ha= s to >>>>>>> work within the larger community of Hyperledger.=C2=A0 We have a un= ified >>>>>>> standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more o= n the wiki.hyperledger.org >>>>>>> ( http://wiki.hyperledger.org )=C2=A0 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>> Silona >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll < daniel.carroll@securebl= ockchains.com >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms.= =C2=A0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing= of >>>>>>>> information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown informa= tion >>>>>>>> into categories and maintain a logical history.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team >>>>>>>> attempting productivity.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah < bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.= com > >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I assume when looking at the community at large we want a solutio= n that is >>>>>>>>> seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the com= munity >>>>>>>>> grows, although cost could be an issue later.. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> You may want to check - =C2=A0https://flock.com/ >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Cheers! >>>>>>>>> Bhaves >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy < yuriy@dybskiy.com > w= rote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Akash, really great proposal! >>>>>>>>>> I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely= =C2=A0+1 on that >>>>>>>>>> one.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>>> Rocket.chat ( http://rocket.chat/ ) is built with Meteor and I u= sed to be a >>>>>>>>>> huge fan of it so I'm=C2=A0+1 on that option as well :) >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so sligh= t >>>>>>>>>> preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat ( http://rocke= t.chat/ ) is >>>>>>>>>> a better option. >>>>>>>>>> Curious what others think. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA < akhosla@berkeley.e= du > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from G= itter to >>>>>>>>>>> another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gi= tter could >>>>>>>>>>> be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't e= ncourage >>>>>>>>>>> dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing u= p for the >>>>>>>>>>> Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such = a cryptic >>>>>>>>>>> interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is syb= il >>>>>>>>>>> resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissi= ons to the >>>>>>>>>>> lists. I think scaling the community requires something better = than email >>>>>>>>>>> and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Couple problems with Gitter: >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Clunky interface >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Poor separation of conversations/rooms >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Bad search function >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Bad mobile app >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known= in dev >>>>>>>>>>> communities: >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *Rocket.chat ( https://rocket.chat/ )* >>>>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy w= ith scripts >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Slack-like interface >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Good search functionality >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Threads ( >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/RocketChat/Rocket.Chat/pull/11803#issuecomme= nt-455963816 >>>>>>>>>>> ) are being implemented >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Usable mobile applications >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Actively maintained + marketplace integrations >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Can deploy at chat.interledger.org ( http://chat.interledger.or= g ) (would >>>>>>>>>>> be happy to help). >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can t= ell, but I >>>>>>>>>>> expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain e= ven more >>>>>>>>>>> support than it already has. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *Discord* >>>>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Commonly used >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Free to use unlike sack >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Fast and friendly >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Solid mobile apps >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Actively maintained >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> No self hosting or maintenance >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Supports integrations >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> May not be free forever >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Chat logs are owned by Discord >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>> More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I= describe >>>>>>>>>>> it as heavier >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so plea= se chime in >>>>>>>>>>> if you have a personal preference or have something to say abou= t these >>>>>>>>>>> platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternative= s, you can >>>>>>>>>>> generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see wha= t you like >>>>>>>>>>> best. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> *Akash Khosla* >>>>>>>>>>> Fourth Year EECS >>>>>>>>>>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>> Yuriy=C2=A0@html5cat ( http://twitter.com/html5cat )=C2=A0Dybski= y >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com >>>>>>>>>> phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Dybskiy.com ( http://dybskiy.com ) /=C2=A0Twitter ( http://twitt= er.com/html5cat >>>>>>>>>> )=C2=A0/=C2=A0GitHub ( http://github.com/html5cat )=C2=A0/=C2=A0= Linkedin ( >>>>>>>>>> http://ca.linkedin..com/in/dybskiy ) >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>>>> Links: >>>>>>>> You receive all messages sent to this group. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> View/Reply Online (#85) ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/me= ssage/85 >>>>>>>> ) | Reply To Sender ( >>>>>>>> ?subject=3DPrivate:%20Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20Pr= oposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else >>>>>>>> ) | Reply To Group ( >>>>>>>> quilt@lists.hyperledger.org?subject=3DRe:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger= %20Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20el= se >>>>>>>> ) | Mute This Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/mt/29637867/15= 40173 ) | >>>>>>>> New Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post ) >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Your Subscription ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/editsub/= 1540173 ) >>>>>>>> | Contact Group Owner ( quilt+owner@lists.hyperledger.org ) | Unsu= bscribe ( >>>>>>>> https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/unsub ) [ sbonewald@linuxfou= ndation.org >>>>>>>> ] >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > --dc9b8763413eb5b56b01d7cbeff87ca085e9e2c47c28b3109d0e90ce5422 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 3D""
    This a public forum= for participating in Interledger's research efforts, including but not lim= ited to:
    1. Scaling
      1. Load balan= cing
      2. Connector topology
    2. Routing
    3. Decentralized = Exchange
      1. Market Making
      2. Fee Markets
    4. Econo= mics
    5. Privacy techniques
    6. Custody
    7. ILP improvements (p= re-RFC)

    This is not the place for:<= /span>
    • Generic crypto and Interledger= discussion (use Slack)
    • Discussing specific PRs and in progress RFC= s (use GitHub)

    Technical questions are ok as long as they are relev= ant and are non-repeats.

    Just don't want to have randos a= sking about when the next ILP plug-in is going to be released on here or "w= hen wallet".

    =

    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS

    On Tue, Feb 5th, 2019 at 9:13 AM, Evan Schwartz <= ;evan@ripple.com> wrote:
    I signed up for a trial Discourse account and submitted the request to= have them host it for free because it's for an open source project. I'm wa= iting to hear back on that and working on getting the DNS set up to point <= a href=3D"http://forum.interledger.org" title=3D"forum.interledger.org" tar= get=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow noopener noreferrer">forum.interledger.org to it (let me know if anyone feels strongly that the domain should be so= mething else). If they don't approve the free hosting request, we can switc= h it over to a self-hosted version (and migrate the data).

    &g= t; Should we use bridging software?

    I= f anyone wants to use it, they would be more than welcome to set it up
    > Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clea= rly defined rules for discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio = (like on https://ethresear.ch/)?

    Possibly; what kind of rules would you envision? (Right now= , though, I'm not too worried about having too much discussion. If that bec= omes a problem, I think we can cross that bridge when we get there)
    On Feb 5 2019, at 4:40 am, AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    =
    Based o= n the comments received and talking to people offline I think what's best g= oing forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an asynchronous forum = to replace email, and have the synchronous chat that replaces Gitter be Dis= cord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to avoid developer overhead.<= /font>

    The only questions are now:
    -What subdomain should the Discourse be at? forum= .interledger.org? or disc.interledger.org or research.interledger.org?=  
    -Doe= s it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules for discus= sions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on https://ethresear.ch/)? I'm leaning more towards this, and I think that's the mos= t effective way to use the platform while ensuring the Interledger communit= y steers toward productive discussions. Early on, we can be lenient about t= his and enforce as needed. 
    -Should we use bridging software?  (= https://github.com/42wim/= matterbridge) Not= e that this is not ideal, because moderation is fragmented, and the interop= erability aspect basically relies on a bot receiving messages from another = client and pushing it to a chat log. You can see the demos on matterbridge = to see what I mean. 
    -Assuming money not an issue, it looks like Slack is t= he preferred way to do things vs. Discord. Only downside is that Slack's in= terface for joining chats is not great (requires an auto-invite tool to be = hosted), but I think that's ok, I've generally had better community experie= nces through Slack despite that.

    As long as we have a Discourse that st= ays with us forever with most of the valuable information, we can always mo= ve our synchronous chat if it ever becomes a problem.
    <= td style=3D"text-align: initial; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-varia= nt-position: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-alternates:= normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-size: 16px; padding: 0px 20p= x; line-height: 24px;">
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS
    3D""

    On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote:
    I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and asynchro= nous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread.

    = Sync
    • Current: Gitter
    • Use case: support= and, to a lesser extent, design discussion
    • Main problem= s: low response rate because a) there aren't enough contributors who are de= dicating time to field issues (myself included) and b) few people have Gitt= er open all the time so checking for new messages is an extra step
    • My take: Slack isn't great for open source projects but it is th= e one that most Interledger contributors have sitting open while they're wo= rking, so if we're optimizing for making sure people get help that might be= the best one
    Async
    • Current: Github I= ssues, Mailing List
    • Use case: design discussion, brainst= orming
    • Main problems: Github issue threads get very long= and unwieldy, sending emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because= it spams everyone's inbox
    • My take: Discourse might be w= orth trying out, based on the experience of the Rust and Ethereum Research = communities, but I'm not sure how different the participation would be on t= hat type of forum versus on Github issues and PRs.
    PS T= hanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion!
    On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr <brian@kava.io> wrote:
    =
    If we want to expand the community, I definit= ely would recommend switching to something that isn't forcing people to lea= rn a new app.  Adding the hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding and eng= agement. 

    I'd recommend slack or d= iscord because most people already have the apps and are familiar with how = to use them. 

    Brian= Kerr
    Co-founder
    Kava.io



    On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 9:= 30 AM, David Fuelling <fuelling@ripple.com> wrote:
    <= div>
    +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support 
    https://www.discourse.org= (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice).

    Agree we need to move off of Gitter.

    On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger si= de to bcc to avoid confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working g= roup which regularly uses Gitter.

    On Mon, Feb 4, 20= 19 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald <sbonewald@linuxfoundation.org> wr= ote:
    Hello,

    Silon= a the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here 
    I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of th= e projects at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system. 

    Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is rocket chat. <= /div>

    Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creati= ng an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID.  Hyperledger also is a project und= er the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those standards as we= ll.

    As a community and especially quilt bring an i= nteropability tool has to work within the larger community of Hyperledger.&= nbsp; We have a unified standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger projec= t process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org 

    Thank you,
    Silona

    On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Dani= el Carroll <daniel.carroll@secureblockchains.com wrot= e:
    It would likely be good to have a coupl= e of different platforms. 

    I like Discord and= Telegram for community chat and general sharing of information. But both a= re limited in how you can breakdown information into categories and maintai= n a logical history. 

    I like Slack and Trello= for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting productivity. 

    Dan

    On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, = Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.com> wrote:

    <= div>
    I assume when looking at the community at large w= e want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has the feature set to= grow as the community grows, although cost could be an issue later..
    =

    You may want to check -  https://flock.com/

    Cheers!
    =
    Bhaves

    On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybs= kiy <yuriy@dybskiy.c= om> wrote:

    = Akash, really great proposal!
    I've been u= sing Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1 on that one.&nb= sp;
    Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to be a huge fan of i= t so I'm +1 on that option as well :)

    = Discord might be the easiest to = setup and more polished so slight preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option.
    Curious what others think.

    On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrot= e:
    Hi all,

    I was = wondering if there would be any interest in moving from Gitter to another p= latform. The main reason I bring this up is because Gitter could be out of = the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't encourage dedicated usa= ge. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up for the Interledger one= is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cryptic interface for the= w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil resistance and anti-spam s= ince there are liberal write permissions to the lists. I think scaling the = community requires something better than email and Gitter. Would be great t= o hear thoughts on this.

    Couple problems wit= h Gitter:
    1. Clunky interface
    2. Poor s= eparation of conversations/rooms
    3. Bad search function
    4. Bad mobile app

    Som= e alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well known in dev communi= ties:

    Pros:
    1. Ope= n source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement)
    2. Sel= f hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy with scripts
    3. Slack-like interface
    4. Good search functio= nality
    5. Threads are being implemented
      6. <= li>
      Usable mobile applications
    6. Actively maintained += marketplace integrations
    7. Can deploy at chat.interledger.org (would b= e happy to help).
    8. Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gi= tter.
    Cons:
    1. Not as well kn= own as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tell, but I expect it to co= ntinue to grow in usage down the line and gain even more support than it al= ready has.

    Discord
    Pros:
    1. Commonly used
    2. F= ree to use unlike sack
    3. Fast and friendly
    4. <= div>Solid mobile apps
  • Actively maintained
  • =
    No self hosting or maintenance
  • Supports integration= s
    • Cons:
    1. May not be free fo= rever
    2. Chat logs are owned by Discord
    3. = More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and I describe it= as heavier

    This list may not be c= omplete in terms of pros and cons so please chime in if you have a personal= preference or have something to say about these platforms or others. I've = spent some time with both alternatives, you can generally find demos on the= ir corresponding websites to see what you like best.

    3D""<= /td>
    Akash Khosla
    F= ourth Year EECS


    --
    =
    Best regards= ,
    Yuriy&n= bsp;@html5cat Dybskiy

    phone: +1 (650) 434-2004

    Dyb= skiy.com / Twitter / GitHub=  / Linkedin
    _._,_._= ,_
    Links:
    You receive all messages sent to this = group.

    View/Reply Online (#85)<= /a> | Reply To Sender | = Reply To Group | Mute This Topic | <= a href=3D"https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post" title=3D"https://list= s.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow noopener = noreferrer">New Topic


    _._,_._,_

    --dc9b8763413eb5b56b01d7cbeff87ca085e9e2c47c28b3109d0e90ce5422-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 18:32:52 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF6DD1288BD for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 18:32:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.22 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ripple.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w0pX6buoHpcN for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 18:32:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk1-x72d.google.com (mail-qk1-x72d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 614A0126C7E for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 18:32:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x72d.google.com with SMTP id d15so3463348qkj.0 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 18:32:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ripple.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:message-id:subject:mime-version; bh=lCIgfZxHLGY5QBcbTHQV6dgwlvukrv1Z6SfUuoJIFs8=; b=fthL/kDunGyEtftojz7sFCPulXjR5QNmQJCPOM9eK+UZ1KXS7mvXr4l86VLKcDTd5k TFUdOg2ZPITmnrcNviqovyc2iXJgcLzBD09EYfDeSmDH8lBjiz7bNcV4A+aN696YT0Lp cTbwKHLQynfYq82KjGQj3Vhgnm3be1XBca5O0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:subject:mime-version; bh=lCIgfZxHLGY5QBcbTHQV6dgwlvukrv1Z6SfUuoJIFs8=; b=lId+Wcpa1+pmCPYlULHpFWNTAaosbyCpHvz72QHHe9oSC4XOsI6PTtRKREGxWic9k6 moNLh/2/NVJk0ZfY8tdFSq6QmNLwtd1DEp93/ZkcMR7etjMnNwR7+YYC86LqLm3T0yTY yx7Y4NMuOtllt1bXPTxTdbh8DvYbKOdGqoeIDIYisrJB889Zp38FtnnKQC9O4q6BBg7C ZyixlRyzV8TiEKDoBRSQwA2RMS0RYPan3TPAEzRuQ9+rFIJyRRd7wfWeXEpQNqn3CemJ fhNumexhgrwnL80kn9YNYxL/wiOjqqQQsnc5gaoxxDmfpBKiZjHVFlY4JcCDIVNnBufI vcgQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZp9M5fe0up2zQ5UA9iMvh1nMc4XtwaN97eypMXfsTAkozlVRXg zjqG5UVoNuVd/NK/kQf7dv9e0w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZUI66U0HNk6eyRaxo/r/Co5250txHd6EMQvo1XXr21B7+3TzazumynvC4Q+G9iibmA6Q0qbw== X-Received: by 2002:a37:9302:: with SMTP id v2mr5869822qkd.202.1549420369415; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 18:32:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from arch (inet-64-112-177-6.bos.netblazr.com. [64.112.177.6]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f7sm12266787qkb.33.2019.02.05.18.32.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 18:32:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 21:32:47 -0500 From: Evan Schwartz To: Interledger Community Group , Interledger Mailing List - IETF Message-ID: <1549419941.local-9475acf2-6929-v1.5.5-b7939d38@getmailspring.com> X-Mailer: Mailspring MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5c5a474f_33671789_4ac8" Archived-At: Subject: [Ledger] New Interledger Community Forum is Live X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 02:32:52 -0000 --5c5a474f_33671789_4ac8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline You can sign up for the Interledger forum at: forum.interledger.org. (https://forum.interledger.org) As discussed on this thread, (https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-interledger/2019Feb/0001.html) we are trying out Discourse as an alternative to the the mailing list and Github issues on the RFCs repo for discussions about protocol designs and improvements, implementations, and applications. There's also a category for beginner questions so we can build up a knowledge base as questions are asked and answered (hopefully more promptly than on Gitter!). See you on the forum! Evan --5c5a474f_33671789_4ac8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
    You can sign up for the Interledger forum at: forum.interledger.org.

    =
    As discussed on this thread,= we are trying out Discourse as an alternative to the the mailing list an= d Github issues on the R=46Cs repo for discussions about protocol designs= and improvements, implementations, and applications. There's also a cate= gory for beginner questions so we can build up a knowledge base as questi= ons are asked and answered (hopefully more promptly than on Gitter=21).
    See you on the forum=21
    Evan
    --5c5a474f_33671789_4ac8-- From nobody Tue Feb 5 21:16:50 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3BC9126C7E for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 21:16:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.04 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.04 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AC_DIV_BONANZA=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PmdXjmvoFP-P for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 21:16:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it1-x144.google.com (mail-it1-x144.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68FAB12426E for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 21:16:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x144.google.com with SMTP id m62so3376432ith.5 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 21:16:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=berkeley-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:date:subject:from:in-reply-to:references:message-id:to :cc; bh=FF1JNZ0a7jbwsx49JtmkgHTWqDjusKnnuML7uUMzK5M=; b=o+vAMceiy359MBxYwV9K8XLbDbQWLRjsoZLoHM5ppiR6Klk6HJXfiZxTBXBJIoLL2n 2YSqpCLbUzwS/YK0nEIXqZmVfrLixfb0dksDFSFR8Q40MSZGa/VPvoCZD6VrtPyK9RJo 7q+jcM93sp4FXbi7qEj1bD4AoC0LzQIEkJCUp8RgEqetZkp5pVuLxIXp1Lod4NmoLSs4 ZICbecVb8VKgD55EEQ2XtuaZH+GrqNPu3ItlFI/G8cwe5NmYYLSJRXj8Sbg56ExkylzA 57Jvh6s0U70bItsui13GMOGRXCHDr1NY3WJLDbJGfokuF1mWB0I6jg6ZJvkeWxPoidHT 6F3g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:subject:from:in-reply-to :references:message-id:to:cc; bh=FF1JNZ0a7jbwsx49JtmkgHTWqDjusKnnuML7uUMzK5M=; b=OXjTHJ/o46wajzMwu4bB3OknaxpRz383DOazVGatyDV0X33/ag8jGeQsE/NoLL4wAU 1AdBQcQ9UC7z/qVAgxjAxcoksxFHpJwYpIsGwtuUOhR2jIKBm2L6yO4mBs4rtXgRSO8J uo0kLmxoIUf67k2OuGryuUmC7efxvnazLOre1wMbnRG/1UTldgccN72em5ddGi/J/YAS Joymk7/Vo91Inl/8d5r25q+xKt86g6JdZqHoQI2WEoE2SGrxq7CiQDk3zCxYm5ehO/GF qzAFZAGwJ77P1WKzNtnA2EzZ9Lr9BRK8ehmNFlmAXqwFn8lU8bgmtZmVkWzkJaN2X7OC IJsA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZ+fCUDJpvK275/oRRIsbAdbcRjJkUtzcfMsbykXBJFeAJP+Y2C pETblDpA4POxoOd6pa2AR07f2XNTdfaQjA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IaWesvRM0y9ABctSxBMnlmoNl/jEWplr2urtj7ZZG/zwbrCnklebi9CVxl+/8VmIXtAubyEpg== X-Received: by 2002:a02:6:: with SMTP id 6mr4574220jaa.19.1549430203218; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 21:16:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (137.175.238.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.238.175.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e141sm3317173itc.40.2019.02.05.21.16.43 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 21:16:43 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 21:16:28 -0800 X-Mailer: Polymail From: "AKASH KHOSLA" In-Reply-To: <5c5a02c055f7b128c9000002@polymail.io> References: <5c5a02c055f7b128c9000002@polymail.io> Message-ID: <5c5a61056f4e0871ff000004@polymail.io> X-Polymail-Id: <5c5a61056f4e0871ff000004@polymail.io> To: "Evan Schwartz" Cc: "Brian Kerr" , "David Fuelling" , "Bhaves Shah" , "Daniel Carroll" , "Yuriy Dybskiy" , "ledger@ietf.org" , "public-interledger@w3.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=76d3688a864a2ee7d5778f7c287ea79d9de41f9b769a4e04ee14027fe56e Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Ledger] [Hyperledger Quilt] Proposal: Switching from Gitter to something else X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 05:16:49 -0000 --76d3688a864a2ee7d5778f7c287ea79d9de41f9b769a4e04ee14027fe56e Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Thanks to Evan for getting this up!=C2=A0https://forum.interledger.org *Akash Khosla* Fourth Year EECS akhosla@berkeley.edu On Tue, Feb 5th, 2019 at 2:2 PM, AKASH KHOSLA wrote: >=20 > This a public forum for participating in Interledger's research efforts, > including but not limited to: > * Scaling > * Load balancing > * Connector topology > * Routing > * Decentralized Exchange > * Market Making > * Fee Markets > * Economics > * Privacy techniques > * Custody > * ILP improvements (pre-RFC) >=20 >=20 >=20 > This is=C2=A0*not*=C2=A0the place for: >=20 >=20 >=20 > * Generic crypto and Interledger discussion (use Slack) > * Discussing specific PRs and in progress RFCs (use GitHub) >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Technical questions are ok as long as they are relevant and are > non-repeats. >=20 >=20 > Just don't want to have randos asking about when the next ILP plug-in is > going to be released on here or "when wallet". >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > *Akash Khosla* > Fourth Year EECS > akhosla@berkeley.edu >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Tue, Feb 5th, 2019 at 9:13 AM, Evan Schwartz < evan@ripple.com > wrote= : >=20 >=20 >=20 >> I signed up for a trial Discourse account and submitted the request to >> have them host it for free because it's for an open source project. I'm >> waiting to hear back on that and working on getting the DNS set up to >> point forum.interledger.org ( http://forum.interledger.org ) to it (let = me >> know if anyone feels strongly that the domain should be something else). >> If they don't approve the free hosting request, we can switch it over to= a >> self-hosted version (and migrate the data). >>=20 >> > Should we use bridging software? >>=20 >> If anyone wants to use it, they would be more than welcome to set it up >>=20 >> > Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules fo= r >> discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on=C2=A0https= ://ethresear.ch/ >> )? >>=20 >> Possibly; what kind of rules would you envision? (Right now, though, I'm >> not too worried about having too much discussion. If that becomes a >> problem, I think we can cross that bridge when we get there) >>=20 >>=20 >> On Feb 5 2019, at 4:40 am, AKASH KHOSLA < akhosla@berkeley.edu > wrote: >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Based on the comments received and talking to people offline I think >>> what's best going forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an >>> asynchronous forum to replace email, and have the synchronous chat that >>> replaces Gitter be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to >>> avoid developer overhead. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> The only questions are now: >>> -What subdomain should the Discourse be at?=C2=A0forum.interledger.org?= or >>> disc.interledger.org or research.interledger.org?=C2=A0 >>> -Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined rules fo= r >>> discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on=C2=A0http= s://ethresear.ch/ >>> )? I'm leaning more towards this, and I think that's the most effective >>> way to use the platform while ensuring the Interledger community steers >>> toward productive discussions. Early on, we can be lenient about this a= nd >>> enforce as needed.=C2=A0 >>> -Should we use bridging software?=C2=A0=C2=A0( https://github.com/42wim= /matterbridge >>> ) Note that this is not ideal, because moderation is fragmented, and th= e >>> interoperability aspect basically relies on a bot receiving messages fr= om >>> another client and pushing it to a chat log. You can see the demos on >>> matterbridge to see what I mean.=C2=A0 >>> -Assuming money not an issue, it looks like Slack is the preferred way = to >>> do things vs. Discord. Only downside is that Slack's interface for join= ing >>> chats is not great (requires an auto-invite tool to be hosted), but I >>> think that's ok, I've generally had better community experiences throug= h >>> Slack despite that. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> As long as we have a Discourse that stays with us forever with most of = the >>> valuable information, we can always move our synchronous chat if it eve= r >>> becomes a problem. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> *Akash Khosla* >>> Fourth Year EECS >>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz < evan@ripple.com > wrot= e: >>>=20 >>>> I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchronous and >>>> asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread. >>>>=20 >>>> Sync >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> Current: Gitter >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> Use case: support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> Main problems: low response rate because a) there aren't enough >>>> contributors who are dedicating time to field issues (myself included)= and >>>> b) few people have Gitter open all the time so checking for new messag= es >>>> is an extra step >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> My take: Slack isn't great for open source projects but it is the one = that >>>> most Interledger contributors have sitting open while they're working,= so >>>> if we're optimizing for making sure people get help that might be the = best >>>> one >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Async >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> Current: Github Issues, Mailing List >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> Use case: design discussion, brainstorming >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> Main problems: Github issue threads get very long and unwieldy, sendin= g >>>> emails to the mailing list seems too weighty because it spams everyone= 's >>>> inbox >>>>=20 >>>> *=20 >>>> My take: Discourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience = of >>>> the Rust and Ethereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how diffe= rent >>>> the participation would be on that type of forum versus on Github issu= es >>>> and PRs. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this discussion! >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr < brian@kava.io > wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> If we want to expand the community, I definitely would recommend swit= ching >>>>> to something that isn't forcing people to learn a new app.=C2=A0 Addi= ng the >>>>> hurdle of that will hurt on-boarding and engagement.=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> I'd recommend slack or discord because most people already have the a= pps >>>>> and are familiar with how to use them.=C2=A0 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Brian Kerr >>>>> Co-founder >>>>> Kava.io >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling < fuelling@ripple.com= > >>>>> wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>> +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support=C2=A0 >>>>>> https://www.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems n= ice). >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Agree we need to move off of Gitter. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla < akhosla@berkeley.edu >= wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Gotcha, in that case I'll move the Hyperledger side to bcc to avoid >>>>>>> confusion - this is focused on the Interledger working group which >>>>>>> regularly uses Gitter. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Silona Bonewald < sbonewald@linuxfou= ndation.org >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I'm afraid this is something we cannot change easily. All of the p= rojects >>>>>>>> at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat system.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Http://Chat.hyperledger.org ( http://Http://Chat.hyperledger.org )= which is >>>>>>>> rocket chat.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Please follow Ry"s directions earlier about creating an LF ID. A L= inux >>>>>>>> foundation ID.=C2=A0 Hyperledger also is a project under the Linux= foundation >>>>>>>> and we also adhere to some of those standards as well. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> As a community and especially quilt bring an interopability tool h= as to >>>>>>>> work within the larger community of Hyperledger.=C2=A0 We have a u= nified >>>>>>>> standard. You can read up on the Hyperledger project process more = on the wiki.hyperledger.org >>>>>>>> ( http://wiki.hyperledger.org )=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>> Silona >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll < daniel.carroll@secureb= lockchains.com >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> It would likely be good to have a couple of different platforms.= =C2=A0 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharin= g of >>>>>>>>> information. But both are limited in how you can breakdown inform= ation >>>>>>>>> into categories and maintain a logical history.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I like Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team >>>>>>>>> attempting productivity.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2019, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah < bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup= .com > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> I assume when looking at the community at large we want a soluti= on that is >>>>>>>>>> seccure in nature and also has the feature set to grow as the co= mmunity >>>>>>>>>> grows, although cost could be an issue later.. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> You may want to check - =C2=A0https://flock.com/ >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Cheers! >>>>>>>>>> Bhaves >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:36 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy < yuriy@dybskiy.com > = wrote: >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Akash, really great proposal! >>>>>>>>>>> I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely= =C2=A0+1 on that >>>>>>>>>>> one.=C2=A0 >>>>>>>>>>> Rocket.chat ( http://rocket.chat/ ) is built with Meteor and I = used to be a >>>>>>>>>>> huge fan of it so I'm=C2=A0+1 on that option as well :) >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Discord might be the easiest to setup and more polished so slig= ht >>>>>>>>>>> preference there, but long term maybe Rocket.chat ( http://rock= et.chat/ ) is >>>>>>>>>>> a better option. >>>>>>>>>>> Curious what others think. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSLA < akhosla@berkeley.= edu > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving from = Gitter to >>>>>>>>>>>> another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because G= itter could >>>>>>>>>>>> be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't = encourage >>>>>>>>>>>> dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing = up for the >>>>>>>>>>>> Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such= a cryptic >>>>>>>>>>>> interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sy= bil >>>>>>>>>>>> resistance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permiss= ions to the >>>>>>>>>>>> lists. I think scaling the community requires something better= than email >>>>>>>>>>>> and Gitter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this. >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Couple problems with Gitter: >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Clunky interface >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Poor separation of conversations/rooms >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Bad search function >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Bad mobile app >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are well know= n in dev >>>>>>>>>>>> communities: >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *Rocket.chat ( https://rocket.chat/ )* >>>>>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement) >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to deploy = with scripts >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Slack-like interface >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Good search functionality >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Threads ( >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/RocketChat/Rocket.Chat/pull/11803#issuecomm= ent-455963816 >>>>>>>>>>>> ) are being implemented >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Usable mobile applications >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Actively maintained + marketplace integrations >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Can deploy at chat.interledger.org ( http://chat.interledger.o= rg ) (would >>>>>>>>>>>> be happy to help). >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Easy sign in with GitHub, just like gitter. >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can = tell, but I >>>>>>>>>>>> expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain = even more >>>>>>>>>>>> support than it already has. >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *Discord* >>>>>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Commonly used >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Free to use unlike sack >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Fast and friendly >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Solid mobile apps >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Actively maintained >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> No self hosting or maintenance >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Supports integrations >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> May not be free forever >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Chat logs are owned by Discord >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some colleagues and = I describe >>>>>>>>>>>> it as heavier >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so ple= ase chime in >>>>>>>>>>>> if you have a personal preference or have something to say abo= ut these >>>>>>>>>>>> platforms or others. I've spent some time with both alternativ= es, you can >>>>>>>>>>>> generally find demos on their corresponding websites to see wh= at you like >>>>>>>>>>>> best. >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> *Akash Khosla* >>>>>>>>>>>> Fourth Year EECS >>>>>>>>>>>> akhosla@berkeley.edu >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>> Yuriy=C2=A0@html5cat ( http://twitter.com/html5cat )=C2=A0Dybsk= iy >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> e-mail: yuriy@dybskiy.com >>>>>>>>>>> phone: +1 (650) 434-2004 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Dybskiy.com ( http://dybskiy.com ) /=C2=A0Twitter ( http://twit= ter.com/html5cat >>>>>>>>>>> )=C2=A0/=C2=A0GitHub ( http://github.com/html5cat )=C2=A0/=C2= =A0Linkedin ( >>>>>>>>>>> http://ca.linkedin..com/in/dybskiy ) >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>>>>> Links: >>>>>>>>> You receive all messages sent to this group. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> View/Reply Online (#85) ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/m= essage/85 >>>>>>>>> ) | Reply To Sender ( >>>>>>>>> ?subject=3DPrivate:%20Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledger%20Quilt%5D%20P= roposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20else >>>>>>>>> ) | Reply To Group ( >>>>>>>>> quilt@lists.hyperledger.org?subject=3DRe:%20Re%3A%20%5BHyperledge= r%20Quilt%5D%20Proposal%3A%20Switching%20from%20Gitter%20to%20something%20e= lse >>>>>>>>> ) | Mute This Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/mt/29637867/1= 540173 ) | >>>>>>>>> New Topic ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/post ) >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Your Subscription ( https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/editsub= /1540173 ) >>>>>>>>> | Contact Group Owner ( quilt+owner@lists.hyperledger.org ) | Uns= ubscribe ( >>>>>>>>> https://lists.hyperledger.org/g/quilt/unsub ) [ sbonewald@linuxfo= undation.org >>>>>>>>> ] >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> _._,_._,_ >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --76d3688a864a2ee7d5778f7c287ea79d9de41f9b769a4e04ee14027fe56e Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 3D""
    Thanks to Evan for getting this up!&nbs= p;https://forum.interledger.org
    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS

    On Tue, Feb 5th, 2019 at 2:2 PM, AKASH KHOSLA <a= khosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    This a public forum for participating in Interledg= er's research efforts, including but not limited to:
    1. Scaling
      1. Load balancing
      2. Connector topology=
    2. Routing
    3. Decentralized Exchange
      1. Market M= aking
      2. Fee Markets
    4. Economics
    5. Privacy techniques=
    6. Custody
    7. ILP improvements (pre-RFC)

    This is not the place for:
    • Generic crypto and Interledger discussion (use Slack)
    • = Discussing specific PRs and in progress RFCs (use GitHub)

    Technica= l questions are ok as long as they are relevant and are non-repeats.=


    On Tue, Feb 5th, 2019 at 9:13 AM, Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote:
    I signed up for a trial Discourse account and submitted the request to= have them host it for free because it's for an open source project. I'm wa= iting to hear back on that and working on getting the DNS set up to point <= a href=3D"http://forum.interledger.org" title=3D"forum.interledger.org" tar= get=3D"_blank" rel=3D"nofollow noopener noreferrer">forum.interledger.org to it (let me know if anyone feels strongly that the domain should be so= mething else). If they don't approve the free hosting request, we can switc= h it over to a self-hosted version (and migrate the data).

    &g= t; Should we use bridging software?

    I= f anyone wants to use it, they would be more than welcome to set it up
    > Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clea= rly defined rules for discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio = (like on https://ethresear.ch/)?

    Possibly; what kind of rules would you envision? (Right now= , though, I'm not too worried about having too much discussion. If that bec= omes a problem, I think we can cross that bridge when we get there)
    On Feb 5 2019, at 4:40 am, AKASH KHOSLA <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:
    Based on the comments received and talking to people offline I thin= k what's best going forward is to create a self-hosted Discourse as an asyn= chronous forum to replace email, and have the synchronous chat that replace= s Gitter be Discord/Slack. No rocket.chat or niche platforms to avoid devel= oper overhead.

    The only questions are now:
    -What subdomain should the Discourse be= at? forum.interledger.org? or disc.interledger.org or research.i= nterledger.org? 
    -Does it make sense for Discourse to have very clearly defined r= ules for discussions for enforcing high signal to noise ratio (like on = ;https://ethresear.ch/)? I'm leaning more towards this, and I think= that's the most effective way to use the platform while ensuring the Inter= ledger community steers toward productive discussions. Early on, we can be = lenient about this and enforce as needed. 
    -Should we use bridging software? = ; (https://gi= thub.com/42wim/matterbridge) Note that this is not ideal, because moderation is fragmented, = and the interoperability aspect basically relies on a bot receiving message= s from another client and pushing it to a chat log. You can see the demos o= n matterbridge to see what I mean. 
    -Assuming money not an issue, it looks = like Slack is the preferred way to do things vs. Discord. Only downside is = that Slack's interface for joining chats is not great (requires an auto-inv= ite tool to be hosted), but I think that's ok, I've generally had better co= mmunity experiences through Slack despite that.

    =
    As long as we have a Di= scourse that stays with us forever with most of the valuable information, w= e can always move our synchronous chat if it ever becomes a problem.=
    3D=
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS
    On Mon, Feb 4th, 2019 at 5:2 PM, Evan Schwartz <evan@ripple.com> wrote:
    I like the idea of categorizing the options into synchron= ous and asynchronous communication methods, as proposed in that Rust thread= .

    Sync
    • Current: Gitter
    • U= se case: support and, to a lesser extent, design discussion
    • <= div>Main problems: low response rate because a) there aren't enough contrib= utors who are dedicating time to field issues (myself included) and b) few = people have Gitter open all the time so checking for new messages is an ext= ra step
  • My take: Slack isn't great for open source proje= cts but it is the one that most Interledger contributors have sitting open = while they're working, so if we're optimizing for making sure people get he= lp that might be the best one
    • Async
    • C= urrent: Github Issues, Mailing List
    • Use case: design dis= cussion, brainstorming
    • Main problems: Github issue threa= ds get very long and unwieldy, sending emails to the mailing list seems too= weighty because it spams everyone's inbox
    • My take: Disc= ourse might be worth trying out, based on the experience of the Rust and Et= hereum Research communities, but I'm not sure how different the participati= on would be on that type of forum versus on Github issues and PRs.
    PS Thanks Akash for taking the initiative to kick off this disc= ussion!

    On Feb 4 2019, at 11:49 am, Brian Kerr <brian@kava.io> wrote:
    <= blockquote>
    If we want to expand the comm= unity, I definitely would recommend switching to something that isn't forci= ng people to learn a new app.  Adding the hurdle of that will hurt on-= boarding and engagement. 

    I'd reco= mmend slack or discord because most people already have the apps and are fa= miliar with how to use them. 

    Brian Kerr
    Co-founder
    Kava.io

    =


    On Mon, Fe= b 04, 2019 at 9:30 AM, David Fuelling <fuelling@ripple.com> wrote:
    =
    +1 for Slack. As a 2nd choice I would support = ;
    https://w= ww.discourse.org (0x forum and chat use that and it seems nice).
    <= div>
    Agree we need to move off of Gitter.

    On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:49 AM Akash Khosla <akhosla@berkeley.edu> wrote:

    Hello,

    =
    Silona the VP of community architecture for Hyperledger here&nbs= p;

    I'm afraid this is something we cannot change e= asily. All of the projects at Hyperledger need to be on the same chat syste= m. 

    Http://Chat.hyperledger.org which is roc= ket chat. 

    Please follow Ry"s directions earl= ier about creating an LF ID. A Linux foundation ID.  Hyperledger also = is a project under the Linux foundation and we also adhere to some of those= standards as well.

    As a community and especially = quilt bring an interopability tool has to work within the larger community = of Hyperledger.  We have a unified standard. You can read up on the Hy= perledger project process more on the wiki.hyperledger.org 

    Thank you,
    Silona

    On Sun, Feb 3, = 2019, 23:25 Daniel Carroll <daniel.carroll@secureblockcha= ins.com wrote:
    It would likely be good= to have a couple of different platforms. 

    I = like Discord and Telegram for community chat and general sharing of informa= tion. But both are limited in how you can breakdown information into catego= ries and maintain a logical history. 

    I like = Slack and Trello for grouping chunks of data within a team attempting produ= ctivity. 

    Dan

    On Feb 3, 20= 19, at 9:47 PM, Bhaves Shah <bhaves.shah@jabjabgroup.com> wrote:
    I assume when looking at the comm= unity at large we want a solution that is seccure in nature and also has th= e feature set to grow as the community grows, although cost could be an iss= ue later..

    You may want to check -  https://flock.com/

    Cheers!
    Bhaves

    On 4 Feb 2019, at 10:3= 6 AM, Yuriy Dybskiy <yuriy@dybskiy.com> wrote:

    Akash, really gr= eat proposal!
    I've been using Discord more and more lately so I'm definitely +1= on that one. 
    Rocket.chat is built with Meteor and I used to = be a huge fan of it so I'm +1 on that option as well :)

    Discord might = be the easiest to setup and more polished so slight preference there, but l= ong term maybe Rocket.chat is a better option.
    Curious what others think.

    On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:02 PM AKASH KHOSL= A <akhosla@ber= keley.edu> wrote:
    Hi all,

    =
    I was wondering if there would be any interest in moving fr= om Gitter to another platform. The main reason I bring this up is because G= itter could be out of the way for a lot of us and the application doesn't e= ncourage dedicated usage. Email lists are a bit old school and signing up f= or the Interledger one is out of the way. I think the reason for such a cry= ptic interface for the w3c style/linux foundation emails list is sybil resi= stance and anti-spam since there are liberal write permissions to the lists= . I think scaling the community requires something better than email and Gi= tter. Would be great to hear thoughts on this.

    Couple problems with Gitter:
    1. Clunky interface
    2. Poor separation of conversations/rooms
    3. B= ad search function
    4. Bad mobile app
    Some alternatives I think users enjoy using, and are wel= l known in dev communities:

    Pros:
    1. Open source chat (basically a friendly IRC replacement)<= /div>
    2. Self hosting is free, cloud options available, easy to d= eploy with scripts
    3. Slack-like interface
    4. Good search functionality
  • Threads are being i= mplemented
  • Usable mobile applications
  • Actively maintained + marketplace integrations
  • Can depl= oy at chat.interl= edger.org (would be happy to help).
  • Easy sign in wit= h GitHub, just like gitter.
    • Cons:
      <= li>
      Not as well known as discord, slack or gitter from what I can tell,= but I expect it to continue to grow in usage down the line and gain even m= ore support than it already has.

    <= strong>Discord
    Pros:
    1. Commonly use= d
    2. Free to use unlike sack
    3. Fast and fr= iendly
    4. Solid mobile apps
    5. Actively mai= ntained
    6. No self hosting or maintenance
    7. Supports integrations
    Cons:
    1. <= div>May not be free forever
  • Chat logs are owned by Disco= rd
  • More complex interface than Slack/Rocket (some collea= gues and I describe it as heavier

    • = This list may not be complete in terms of pros and cons so please chime in = if you have a personal preference or have something to say about these plat= forms or others. I've spent some time with both alternatives, you can gener= ally find demos on their corresponding websites to see what you like best.<= /div>

    3D""
    Akash Khosla
    Fourth Year EECS


    --
    Best regards,
    Yuriy = @html5cat Dybskiy

    phone: +1 (650) 434-2004
    =
    <= /div>
    =

    --76d3688a864a2ee7d5778f7c287ea79d9de41f9b769a4e04ee14027fe56e-- From nobody Tue Feb 19 13:42:19 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3845C130FBA for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:42:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopebailie.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3MH-CzSdE_OQ for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:42:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-x332.google.com (mail-ot1-x332.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::332]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3324E130FAE for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:42:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-x332.google.com with SMTP id z19so36971154otm.2 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:42:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopebailie.com; s=google; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=HE2Li2jxb2gVq3RtpNsn3aF/mFwFpe8J4XF0F5NE94U=; b=IOPFHGqMF8Dl2mIr+OaPaDwdYGMGDZ3ngyUvk2jewAYal3F5GbdOLPPNdklyLkMzAl 3dBC1n5BFIgbUxsovixR5wiQUVfVb6ADLnHMgBloT9HAXgMUk3fTjR7ingOQWeXfX/Zp PE274faSlEEr2ENDECpDCTyhkZl5hMs4IMYA0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=HE2Li2jxb2gVq3RtpNsn3aF/mFwFpe8J4XF0F5NE94U=; b=lJPY7E7rHdC4Ii60a18JHJXmIEct1Q1d4MW2gbCv5yTMfq2dX2O/shPRbdE3qeQ7EW ptT92NlHVqZqnlgwBOQsUmIlR2oUxWBJd26P22HX5U28hKao6TSOHBemZPFnFyUIYdlh 35QSjXl01MzQC9p2SjdXQ0N/+6/ajjJ9kBX/SzAxSiI5FRAl0ITbrftYUE+tBv8Hdqe+ rHEYDfKswFKgzehOzfECD8OiN2Yh4e7vMmZqNmNB/0DQZHExVU1/fVAXwsJOh8bmiTZk Idu4yFnTAZB5aBCqR5vwn2mJ3VMsNwe+9IGZJjd7SeyAf/81qLV3g+0Z6gpf4nLrTFDi qzxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAubB86asRHIdcCueayS1/ZPSkEas3HyE33/hHuZ02znNcpzrH6W4 JoY+cR7RgNC9WWXWRPTyo4YjWZ2CLYi3zPcxUzkw/aNoUwfeVA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYRAcsWmc2JcwieaczJAOcLjm48uhyRb8nVztEzxQNIHXNJHFPd1hdYv7UuLv5uklubjEbU7EDRQY6VbM/t+SY= X-Received: by 2002:aca:ed06:: with SMTP id l6mr3885443oih.7.1550612533153; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:42:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Adrian Hope-Bailie Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 23:41:59 +0200 Message-ID: To: Interledger Community Group , Hyperledger Quilt Mailing List , Interledger Mailing List - IETF Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0000000000003950c60582461d17" Archived-At: Subject: [Ledger] AGENDA - Interledger Call - 20 February - 3pm UTC X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 21:42:18 -0000 --0000000000003950c60582461d17 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003950c20582461d15" --0000000000003950c20582461d15 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, This week Kava will talk us through their beta API for cross-chain trading that aims to maker it simpler to build apps and wallets on top of Interledger We'll also review the latest hot topics on the forums and hear about some of the new connector design work being done: https://forum.interledger.org/t/plugin-architecture-and-ledger-integrations= /42 We'd like to use the forum to propose topics for future calls. Bring your thoughts on how this could work to the call. Note that all the recent calls are available to listen to from the website: https://interledger.org/calls.html Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/s/377506344 Or iPhone one-tap: US: +14086380968,,377506344# or +16468769923,,377506344# Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 408 638 0968 <+1%20408%20638%200968> or +1 646 876 9923 <+1%20646%20876%209923> or +1 669 900 6833 <+1%20669%20900%206833> Meeting ID: 377 506 344 International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/cbrUAzE3W --0000000000003950c20582461d15 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Hi all,

    This week Kava will talk us through their = beta API for cross-chain trading that aims to maker it simpler to build app= s and wallets on top of Interledger

    We= 'll also review the latest hot topics on the forums and hear about some= of the new connector design work being done:=C2=A0https://= forum.interledger.org/t/plugin-architecture-and-ledger-integrations/42<= /div>

    We'd like to use the forum to propose topics f= or future calls. Bring your thoughts on how this could work to the call.

    Note that all the rece= nt calls are available to listen to from the website:

    Join from PC, Mac, Lin= ux, iOS or Android:=C2=A0h= ttps://zoom.us/s/377506344

    = Or iPhone one-tap:
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0US: +14086= 380968,,377506344# or +16468769923,,377506344#
    Or Telephone:<= /div>
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Dia= l(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):=C2=A0<= /font>
    =C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0US:=C2=A0+1 408 638 0968=C2=A0or=C2=A0+1 646 876 9923=C2=A0or=C2=A0+1 6= 69 900 6833=C2=A0
    = =C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Meeting ID: 377 506 344
    =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Internation= al numbers available:=C2=A0https://zoom.us/u/cbrUAzE= 3W
    --0000000000003950c20582461d15-- --0000000000003950c60582461d17 Content-Type: text/calendar; charset="US-ASCII"; name="ilp-2019-02-20.ics" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ilp-2019-02-20.ics" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: X-Attachment-Id: f_jscan0x50 QkVHSU46VkNBTEVOREFSDQpWRVJTSU9OOjIuMA0KQ0FMU0NBTEU6R1JFR09SSUFODQpCRUdJTjpW RVZFTlQNCkRUU1RBTVA6MjAxOTAyMjBUMDAwNDU0Wg0KVUlEOjIwMTkwMjIwQGludGVybGVkZ2Vy Lm9yZw0KRFRTVEFSVDoyMDE5MDIyMFQxNTAwMDBaDQpEVEVORDoyMDE5MDIyMFQxNjAwMDBaDQpT VU1NQVJZOkludGVybGVkZ2VyIENvbW11bml0eSBDYWxsDQpVUkw6aHR0cHMlM0ElMkYlMkZ6b29t LnVzJTJGcyUyRjM3NzUwNjM0NA0KREVTQ1JJUFRJT046Sm9pbiBmcm9tIFBDXCwgTWFjXCwgTGlu dXhcLCBpT1Mgb3IgQW5kcm9pZDogaHR0cHM6Ly96b29tLnVzL3MvMzc3NTA2MzQ0XG5cbk9yIGlQ aG9uZSBvbmUtdGFwOlxuICAgIFVTOiArMTQwODYzODA5NjhcLFwsMzc3NTA2MzQ0IyBvciArMTY0 Njg3Njk5MjNcLFwsMzc3NTA2MzQ0I1xuXG5PciBUZWxlcGhvbmU6XG4gICAgRGlhbChmb3IgaGln aGVyIHF1YWxpdHlcLCBkaWFsIGEgbnVtYmVyIGJhc2VkIG9uIHlvdXIgY3VycmVudCBsb2NhdGlv bik6IFxuICAgIFVTOiArMSA0MDggNjM4IDA5Njggb3IgKzEgNjQ2IDg3NiA5OTIzIG9yICsxIDY2 OSA5MDAgNjgzMyBcbiAgICBNZWV0aW5nIElEOiAzNzcgNTA2IDM0NFxuICAgIEludGVybmF0aW9u YWwgbnVtYmVycyBhdmFpbGFibGU6IGh0dHBzOi8vem9vbS51cy91L2NiclVBekUzV1xuDQpFTkQ6 VkVWRU5UDQpFTkQ6VkNBTEVOREFS --0000000000003950c60582461d17-- From nobody Thu Feb 28 23:44:43 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ledger@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8312512D4EC for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 23:44:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopebailie.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ty3aX7L7aaID for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 23:44:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi1-x233.google.com (mail-oi1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D4A4130DD6 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 23:44:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi1-x233.google.com with SMTP id t206so18788917oib.3 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 23:44:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopebailie.com; s=google; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JfjXBNGcderbma4MDiL5BmeoMVGs1EfrUhjOx4J1xRA=; b=Z7DBZW5ZzVNG2xo6xYepUkFinnvI+2+Y4a1pU1rnkkIG6M46Yn+18V9gHU2JorOusu cSkEoOZZ6aMgwrFl6yg+yGgb44E4zoyESuu/afFNm9kVJu3dBCxGMbcYEWcFOeQ+FlW/ JuRbMu/0ewbmYdWknWtjdBv/f24sTfWWypcTQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JfjXBNGcderbma4MDiL5BmeoMVGs1EfrUhjOx4J1xRA=; b=h7qKPIq5hwklDk7plxVQM4XJYn4kSlkIHvw9xT9nZKBX+jK+viP4Kd720bqyjDk5D4 lkivOiwY3OJs8CNZ33fcshFPdq8J/IO6yGFVpsDQWaJdhozpAjZ3VjsaXZ/3+eq15LXg n0dT0uIO9jCbg9U0aCmdcvXPTbEP8GbgeYsbM5h+NmGoUz2DUQaVjSB3CUOBJuF5W9gg KrSncp54T8WFJhB1mmWAH8Dzm0xEit0HTKOn0/Gfduhql9gc44h3JeY/ux71Prr+nO9E cSSmk2jeJXSuB+3KDQCh4YDkHyihZRxinTJHdfFz5GK/KEDafRfFq9p0cpsyNUgTmkkh FlSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuaf1iVqi0oF2edbNFaW4YQZQftIh/D1wfCW5Tb0gXqQVBIHDX+j SntsPs5hrGlgujrvyg8EqOzx28AegPNxonHm0cgIAg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZt+ZKeD/0TZaDtr9u+GZdYqEMyb+bHjoMSuaWuMNhpGlPWVYqOuLtFoobmFK8a8RId2BtPOrUpCLR4P67b18U= X-Received: by 2002:aca:cc06:: with SMTP id c6mr2383156oig.168.1551426278989; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 23:44:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Adrian Hope-Bailie Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 09:44:08 +0200 Message-ID: To: Interledger Community Group , Interledger Mailing List - IETF , Hyperledger Quilt Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004137ae058303944d" Archived-At: Subject: [Ledger] Topics for 6 March Interledger Community Call X-BeenThere: ledger@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of interledger, originally a protocol stack for moving digital assets \(making payments\) between accounts operating on different payment networks or ledgers." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 07:44:41 -0000 --0000000000004137ae058303944d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi all, Evan has created a topic on the forum to build an agenda for next week's call: https://forum.interledger.org/t/community-call-march-6-2019/273 Please add any topics there you'd like to discuss. Adrian --0000000000004137ae058303944d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Hi all,

    Evan has creat= ed a topic on the forum to build an agenda for next week's call:=C2=A0<= a href=3D"https://forum.interledger.org/t/community-call-march-6-2019/273">= https://forum.interledger.org/t/community-call-march-6-2019/273
    Please add any topics there you'd like to discuss.
    Adrian
    --0000000000004137ae058303944d--