Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ways to make BTP more minimal? #590

Open
michielbdejong opened this issue Feb 28, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Ways to make BTP more minimal? #590

michielbdejong opened this issue Feb 28, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@michielbdejong
Copy link
Contributor

The stated motivation of BTP is to be a link-layer protocol like ILP-over-HTTP but using WebSockets instead of HTTP POST.

I understand BTP has to be more complex than ILP-over-HTTP because it needs to link responses to requests. This justifies the Request ID part of BTP, and I guess also the Message, Response and Error message types.

But first, what motivates the Transfer message type? If we can already do transfers with ILP's message types, do we still need BTP-level transfers?

And second, I understand how BTP Subprotocols can be handy, but if we think that such a feature is useful and we allow connectors to rely on it for their operation, then why don't we add it to other link protocols too? It seems a bit surprising that BTP has this extra functionality but ILP-over-HTTP doesn't.

Could we define a version of BTP that is as minimal as it can be, comparable to the current ILP-over-HTTP protocol?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant