4

So we know that how network making consensus is not just POW, it's more about numbers of full nodes. And this is how the Tangle solve Byzantine Generals Problem.

My question is will these full nodes keep distributed after coordinator removed? Won't big companies want to centralized their nodes or make their own coordinators to control certain portion of network?

Sorry for this silly question, but this thought make me worry problems similar to minepool in blockchain.

2

The coordinator plays a role in the network today only because fullnodes accept it. The current version of the IRI handle milestones (i.e. transactions issued by the coordinator) with specific code (basically, any transaction validated by a milestone is considered confirmed).

A tangle with a centralised coordinator owned by another entity than the IOTA foundation will not be accepted by other fullnode.

Big companies will probably run private (cluster of) fullnodes dedicated to their own devices.

There is no incentives to run a fullnode apart offering an entry point in the tangle for your own devices. There is no benefit to run/own more fullnodes than what is necessary to receive transactions from your own devices.

On traditional blockchain, the only reason for centralization is that there are incentives to run miners. On the tangle, those incentives don't exists, so there is IMO no reason to expect this any kind of centralization.

  • So in current network, transactions are confirmed by coordinator. How do transactions get confirmed after coordinator is removed in the future? – Wayne Wu Jan 25 '18 at 1:12
  • Just found this question in other post: iota.stackexchange.com/questions/311/… I think this is future version of IRI going to be implemented right? – Wayne Wu Jan 25 '18 at 1:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.