Embrace libp2p and replace the frame concept with protocols about rfcs HOT 5 CLOSED

Love it.

from rfcs.

And me.

from rfcs.

Just had another insight: The proposal above is also nice because it favors composition over inheritance (a problem that has already been identified here).

Instead of creating abstractions that all further protocols have to adhere to, we only set boundaries (must be a libp2p protocol).

from rfcs.

Another idea regarding what the individual RFCs would define:

001: Tech stack: libp2p, tcp, secio, etc
002: Define only a language for atomic swaps (alpha/beta, ledger, asset, swap protocols):
003: Define an HTLC-based atomic swap, define the libp2p-protocol string, define the messages that need be exchanged, including the format (JSON f.e.)

from rfcs.

We did agree that we want to go for this, but no immediate action can be taken as part of this issue.
Hence, I will close as it can still be referred to for future implementations.

from rfcs.