Direct sending of FRX from “A” to “B” was disabled due to 100% decentralization “PathDry Error” due to the negative FRX balance on the counterparty. This is reason why it opens the door to non-direct payments. In order to send FRX form “A” to “B”. You could either trade XRP:FRX via p2p trade. Or “B” should create “trust line” for FRX currency to “A” address and make it additional counterparty and send FRX inside “A” to “B”. Any assets could be transferred using FRX. Just use P2P counterparty FRX trade, using any assets: (USD, XAU, GBP, BTC, REP, DASH and others).
Negative balance is gone but problem is not!
Decentralized community tried to solve the problem with transaction “Path_DRY” issue. By reducing negative FRX balance on Frinkcoin counterparty. But problem didn’t solve as we expected. And direct transactions still shows “Path Dry” problem. Unfortunately nothing we can do right now with this issue due to the fact that no one controls “PIE” address secret keys and have no access for this counterparty. But there is no problem trading FRX on XRPL Dex or via P2P trades.
Due to the fact that Toast Wallet and Ripple Desktop Wallet are shut down this is not good or bad for the community. But unfortunately closing open source XRP Client wallets it is not a good trend. As we build FRX Decentralized Coin mainly on the Toast Wallet platform we are also facing some issues. Ripple developers and Coil didn’t show enough respect for the Toast Wallet and they decide to go down with this great project. We regret that a lot! But they can’t remove and take away FRX coins on XRP Ledger. Or delete them from your balance. No one has power over it!
Creating value from FRX – P2P
What is the use case for FRX Coin inside XRP Ledger? How could you use coins inside the ledger? One of the use cases and options to use FRX Coins is Privacy transfers between XRP Addresses using FRX/XRP P2P pairing trade.
For example: You want to transfer “10 000 XRP” to the other address but you don’t want it to be displayed on “XRP Scan Payments list” and you don’t want people’s attention where do you move your funds right?
One of the options is to create FRX/XRP P2P trade between your addresses that only your two addresses could trade FRX/XRP inside the system. Then on one of your address you open p2p trade and set the price for:
1 FRX : 1 XRP.
On the other your address you buy or sell that amount for 1 XRP, so you trade 10 000 FRX for 10 000 XRP between your two accounts.
Now on the other account you have 10 000 XRP transferred without displaying your payments on XRP Scan Payments list! So you traded between yourself and payed from “A” to “B” – 10 000 XRP but it is not shown. And you used FRX for this concealment.
Yes it is not 100% privacy transaction but it is really complicated to track all your p2p trades and check what and how many XRP moved. And also your transaction is not gonna be shown on the “Payments List”. This privacy way to make transaction is already available for users inside your wallets.
Transaction won’t display here:
TRC 10-20, ERC 20 to FRX (xrpl)
One of the great options to trade FRX coins outside the XRP Ledger would be automatic 1:1 swaps. On build applications just swap your FRX coins on the ledger to the same amount of FRINK Coins build on ERC 20 or TRC 10-20 protocols. Withdraw them or trade on the other exchanges and DEX’s.
For example you have 10 000 FRX coins of XRP Ledger and you want to trade them on the other exchanges outside the ledger? So you use automatic swap application and change your 10 000 FRX to 10 000 FRINK coins build on ERC20 or TRC10-20 protocols. It is much easier to trade and withdraw coins on the other protocols and list them on the exchanges.
To make coin swaps much robust and legit inter ledger protocol is the perfect tool to make it happen.
Interledger is an open protocol suite for sending payments across different ledgers.
Interledger is an open protocol suite for sending payments across different ledgers. Like the Internet, connectors route packets of money across independent networks. The open architecture and minimal protocol enable interoperability for any value transfer system.
Interledger is not tied to a single company, blockchain, or currency.
Interledger takes care of getting your money from ledger A to ledger Z, so you can get back to building awesome things! If you’re interested, learn more about how the magic works.
Building on XRP Ledger is coming hype
New DTCC White Paper Gets Real About Blockchain Hype
The DTCC—or Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation—is the predominant financial institution that manages the centralized clearing and settling of securities.
Talk about timing.
Last week, the two firms best known for going after the securities settlement use case settlement took turns sharing the limelight.
First, R3 announced that they were experimenting with an iteration of Ethereum through Microsoft’s Blockchain as a Service platform with nearly a dozen banks. Later, Digital Asset Holdings announced a plump Series A, raising $52 million from predominantly strategic investors, valuing the company at $100 million.
Big wins for two firms confidently surfing the current wave of blockchain fueled hype.
It’s no wonder that R3 and DAH are jumping head first into the space in a huge way. As DTCC President and CEO Michael Bodson noted in a press release accompanying the latest white paper, “The industry has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reimagine and modernize its infrastructure to resolve long-standing operational challenge.”
But he also added a caveat—that the potential is there, but only if we approach these problems from the right way. As Bodson explained, “To realize the potential of distributed ledger technology in a responsible manner and to avoid a disconnected maze of siloed solutions, the industry must work together in a coordinated fashion.”
If that last bit sounds like a bit of a party crasher, it’s because, maybe it is.
Now… “you could argue the DTCC has a vested interest in protecting the “old way” of doing things,” FT Alphaville’s Izabella Kaminska prudently admits. But “it’s also worth thinking of the DTCC as the “master sorcerer” in this equation They’ve been doing this stuff for much longer than any of the start-up fintech crowd.”
Which is a point well taken here at Ripple Insights. After all, we’ve been citing the DTCC for quite some time in trying to better understand what use cases truly make sense for blockchain technology.
A favorite is their 2012 paper, which analyzes the benefits and costs of reducing the securities settlement cycle.
One of the primary conclusions of that report is that the databasing functionality was indeed not the bottleneck toward reducing settlement time and cost. More important was industry support, risk management, regulations and compatibility with and consideration of legacy systems.
Nearly four years later, the DTCC’s latest paper builds on those themes more explicitly.
New platforms will only be relevant if they can integrate with existing systems, which already work quite well. That’s a lot of work:
In assessing the applicability of distributed ledgers to post-trade processing, it is important to understand that the distributed ledger platforms in use today are simply a ledger of transactions that is essentially replicated to all of the cooperating servers. The technology does not have built-in integration with existing systems and supporting infrastructure. It does not simply integrate with user identity management systems or have any master data about legal entities or securities. It does not include supporting workflows, exception processing or any of the extensive preprocessing logic that often accompanies complex matching, allocation and other processes that precede the point at which a transaction is considered complete.
Decentralized systems are inherently less efficient—implying that we better have a good reason to use them in the first place:
Decentralized processing is, by definition, a shared computing function among members of a community (trusted or not), which requires synchronization and coordination. Some implementations of distributed ledger, such as Bitcoin, use a consensus mechanism to manage coordination, while others use variations such as a lead node mechanism. Regardless, all such designs include steps that add latency to transaction processing. A decentralized design requires significant computing and storage resources because all nodes perform the computations and store the ledger data, which can also result in significantly increased network bandwidth requirements depending on the number of network nodes and the size of each transaction.
And then what about regulations?
Global regulatory requirements for data privacy that are different based on geography raise additional challenges for decentralized systems that distribute every transaction to every node. In certain regulatory jurisdictions, the laws protecting an individual’s data privacy restrict the ability to store certain data outside of the regulated region. Several vendors have recently proposed alternative “partitioned” ledgers to address these challenges, but given that all of the current work on distributed ledger technology has been done without regulatory oversight or endorsement, it is still unclear as to the level of regional data containment that will be required.
And so the DTCC concludes:
…a mature, supported, integrated distributed ledger technology has the potential to help improve a number of existing financial market infrastructure limitations. However, it may not be the solution to every problem because there may be alternative opportunities to lower the costs and risks of current infrastructure by standardizing industry workflows and expanding the use of cloud technologies.
Which, incidentally, is the same conclusion that the Vermont state government came to last week, as we report.
It’s also one of the key themes that we’ve been harping on all year—that 2016 will be the year that you realize you don’t need the blockchain for your particular use case.
That isn’t to say that the DTCC—or Ripple Insights for that matter—doesn’t believe that we’re experiencing a once-in-a-life-time shift in how we approach these kinds of financial problems. Which is also why we’re incredibly excited to see what the likes of R3 and DAH have in store for the industry over the next few years:
This is the opportunity to create an industry-wide initiative to develop the right architecture, prioritize the infrastructure building blocks and support focused and collaborative experiments to help the technology mature.
For a second there, it almost sounds like they’re talking about the Internet of Value.