[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Blockchain and Networking
- Subject: Blockchain and Networking
- From: alter3d at alter3d.ca (Peter Kristolaitis)
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 02:39:22 -0500
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
On 2018-01-08 10:19 PM, John Levine wrote:
> In article <0c45eee2-ffcb-2066-1456-eb2d38075007 at alter3d.ca>,
> Peter Kristolaitis <alter3d at alter3d.ca> wrote:
>> We can build all of the above in other ways today, of course.Â But
>> there's certainly something to be said for a vendor-supported solution
>> that is inherent in the platform and requires no additional
>> infrastructure.Â ...
> No additional infrastructure? Blockchains need multiple devices that
> are online and have enough storage to keep a full copy of the chain.
There is absolutely no reason that the networking equipment itself can't
both operate the blockchain and keep a full copy.Â It's a pretty good
bet that your own routers will probably be online;Â if not, you have
The storage requirements aren't particularly onerous.Â The entire
Bitcoin blockchain is around 150GB, with several orders of magnitude
more transactions (read: config changes) than you're likely to see even
on a very large network.Â SSDs are small enough and reliable enough now
that the physical space requirements are quite small.
> They make sense in an environment with multiple sophisticated parties
> that sort of but not entirely trust each other, but there aren't as
> many of those as you might think.
You (presumably) trust your own routers.Â There is absolutely no reason
that your own little network can't run your own private blockchain.Â Â In
fact, for my use case of configuration management, you wouldn't WANT to
use a single global public blockchain.