Author

Topic: achieve sybil attack resistance using an existing distributed asset: domain name (Read 198 times)

newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 1
the amount of coins would not be infinite.
it is the same in proof of work more computing power does not mean printing more coins
newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 1
If a node loses access, it will not be possible to communicate with the rest of the network.
Do you really think that icann will ban all domain names to "control" the network?
 It is the same logic as proof of work. it is assumed that the majority is honest.
If proof of stake is possible using an asset from the network itself, why wouldn't it be possible to use an asset from outside the network?
legendary
Activity: 2870
Merit: 7490
Crypto Swap Exchange
the amount of coins would not be infinite.
it is the same in proof of work more computing power does not mean printing more coins

You're missing my point. Both PoW and PoS based on limited/costly resource (computational power and coin), but your idea is based on far less limited/costly resource where ICANN and domain name provider can generate bunch of domain at very low cost. Whereas everyone else have to pay few dollars per year only for single domain.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
The idea is simple. 
Each node must have a valid domain name.
A node is randomly selected to mine a block.
Using an internet asset to create a decentralized and energy efficient cryptocurrency.

This works well with Java, Android, and publishing packages on the internet. Less so for cryptocurrency.

As an example, I have currently 4 (!!!) domain names in my hosting panel right now. What stops me from directing all of them towards my node?

You see, domains by themselves do not provide any cryptographic security whatsoever. And this strikes me as a form of proof-of-stake, but without any kind of probabilities calculation at all.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
I don't understand how's that any different to one-IP-one-vote.

nothing. nobody has implemented this idea before because maybe it is not "decentralized" enough.
It is completely centralized as the domain provider or domain producer (i.e., ICANN), have all voting power. You just invented a more complicated version of fiat.

Genuine question: how do nodes verify that someone was a minter? The moment someone loses permission to a domain name, they can no longer provide sufficient evidence that they minted a block, and hence, does not solve Byzantine generals' problem.
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
There are still businesses with 10s of thousands of .com addresses under their control.
I don't have an exact count but one of my clients probably has about 1500 to 1600 of active domains.
What you are proposing is just another form of PoS junk.

You want something, in this case BTC, you have to work (mine) for it. Or just go to an exchange and buy some.

-Dave

full member
Activity: 161
Merit: 230
This is a bad idea - the domain name "economy" is based on the name itself being valuable, if suddenly just having a domain would be valuable in itself, you would see billions of domain names registered the instant it goes into production, probably by some non-US country administration that can register any amount of domains they want in their TLD for free.
legendary
Activity: 4508
Merit: 3425
The idea is simple.  
Each node must have a valid domain name.

If the solution were so simple, it would have implemented a decades ago. What stops a node from having multiple domain names? You have only replaced proof-of-work with proof-of-domain-names.
newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 1
The idea is simple. 
Each node must have a valid domain name.
A node is randomly selected to mine a block.
Using an internet asset to create a decentralized and energy efficient cryptocurrency.
Jump to: