Revocation rules

Consider the case of the lender dropping a bitcoin onto a web based pipeline control, a web router.  The money, in the public contract, is considered bearer cash, it is controlled by wallet through which any counter party checks results along the way.

So a bitcoin is dropped onto pipeline control with a one year revoking right.  At the month point, the deposit is revoked, all the counter party transactions rolled back. The loan is complete.

Counter parties know the loan due date, they will reduce costs by leaving sufficient cash to cover the roll back. Counter  parties may be required to drop  off insurance fees along the way, and these fees are resolved by timeout with recall.  If the contract  is well  written and stable  with nested revokes, then this all works.  

It works because we limit our protocols the finite spanning tree, any loop finite bound. Looking at that shape we can see any roll back is limited to a descending branch from the roll back node.  Roll back rules treated by notaries the same, checking the result prior to continuance. So, a counter party  drops the revoke back to its most recent deposit.  Any other party will check the roll back results on the  ledger, and can further the roll back if not satisfied. We  have stability.

I suspect that we can do quite complex multi-party contracts using this method and web based router can be a handy tool in smart contracts.

Simple rules on protocol trees

• A move from one node, up or down, causes observable changes in external public ledgers.
• Any party can force a rollback to their last point of stake, their last deposit with rollback option.
• Rollbacks cause uncertain congestion fees, rising toward the timeout period and roll backs of market events have price risk.
• Doing  nothing more by any party causes the timeout to resolve in stable outcome.

The last item is derived, in default all the proof of stake points will default to consented. Beyond that there are options about the rules on notary cartels, but contract pricing and congestion mostly manages the problem. 

We can easily drop the web based routers anywhere, a cheap way to get on and off the pits and balance portfolios.  Traders, for example, are likely to drop a wad of cash in the morning, then balance the portfolios indirectly via a robotic notary.  The notary has to be robotic because it needs roll back congestion prices and needs to check asynchronously on events happening as planned on the ledgers.  

In single party mode, a roll back is just a expensive way to avoid timeout, the roll back rules keep the current portfolio, just accumulates cash and returning to the  original ledger.  There is freedom in roll backs and we can define the rollback contract between any two nodes.

Counterfeit web router

The router fraud is considered a counterfeit, either processor or code is faked.  The processor guarantees proof of work instruction cache.

The solution is cyber notary, and gynab thumbprints. Doable,  solving counterfeit, but not my thing. Crypto experts can do it. The counterfeit problem is equivalent  to having the machine hold a secret key unobservable by humans. Doable in the linux environment.