• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Pre-Proposal: Create the first DASH gateway on Ripple

This looks promising. How are the currency to currency exchange rates calculated? Is it just the straight conversion of the ripple price to Dash or BTC or ETH based on http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ (or similar external source) plus a fee or is there internal pricing with markups / downs based on the gateway.
 
This looks promising. How are the currency to currency exchange rates calculated? Is it just the straight conversion of the ripple price to Dash or BTC or ETH based on Coinmarketcap (or similar external source) plus a fee or is there internal pricing with markups / downs based on the gateway.

The Ripple network contains a built-in market between all currencies that exist within the network. You can have a look at existing markets https://charts.ripple.com/ . Basically any user can place a limit order between any two currencies; this creates market liquidity (order book) that is then used to convert between currencies. All of this is featured on the Ripple ledger itself; the gateways merely function as entry points for deposits/withdrawals.

All of this works even without the XRP markets (e.g. DASH/XRP, BTC/XRP, USD/XRP), so you have direct BTC/USD markets etc. There is an extra feature though called "auto-bridging": if you look at an order book, eg. GateHub's BTC/EUR, you'll see both direct BTC/EUR orders, plus combined orders via the XRP markets, so combined BTC/XRP and XRP/EUR.

Gateways (IOU issuers) may charge a fee (specified as percentage) on all trades and transfers.

Edit: links
 
180 Dash x $88 = $15,840

The work will be covered by a team of 2-3 people. The total expense consists of compensation for the team. Other costs are negligible.

Part of the received DASH funding will also be used directly for initial liquidity (market making) on the newly established DASH markets on Ripple.

How much do you intend to set aside for initial liquidity?

DASH budget funding will make our decision to integrate DASH much easier.

Currently GateHub Fifth offers BTC , ETH, ETC and REP. Dash's market cap currently exceeds ETC and REP. Seems to me it makes good business sense for you to offer the leading cryptocurrencies by market cap, even if you pay your own dev costs (as I assume you did for those other cryptocurrencies).

I would hate for you to think that the Dash MN network is an easy mark to get funding for something you fully intend to do anyway. $15k is a steep price to pay just to, "make our decision to integrate DASH much easier."
 
As @jimbursch already pointed out, you have have integrated other cryptos with a lower market cap.

Presumably these projects did not pay for their respective integrations.

As it stands I will vote No to this proposal.

All the best with the venture though!
 
Why are your volumes for eg. Etherium so low? Has your gateway only just opened?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2084.jpg
    IMG_2084.jpg
    205.8 KB · Views: 165
Currently GateHub Fifth offers BTC , ETH, ETC and REP. Dash's market cap currently exceeds ETC and REP. Seems to me it makes good business sense for you to offer the leading cryptocurrencies by market cap, even if you pay your own dev costs (as I assume you did for those other cryptocurrencies).

As @jimbursch already pointed out, you have have integrated other cryptos with a lower market cap.

Presumably these projects did not pay for their respective integrations.

You are right, they did not. As it turns out, decisions to integrate both ETC and REP were a bit special. We were pushed into ETC in integration by the market at the time of the ETH/ETC fork as we already had ETH integrated and the users naturally expected us to credit them their ETC as well; it was a lot of tedious work for very little benefit. As for REP, we integrated it before REP event went live on the Ethereum network as an attempt to provide the first liquid price discovery for REP, but unfortunately that didn't catch on as well as we would have wanted it to.

For a small start-up exchange, integrating a new currency is always a risky game. It takes precious resources that could be spent otherwise, but the trading might not catch on. What we are trying to do here is mitigate this risk with DASH. Not getting funded here will push DASH integration down the priority list, thereby postponing the decision whether to do it for months, and then it may never happen as there are always new things to do in crypto.

We also honestly believe that integrating two cryptos, DASH and Ripple, will bring synergic benefits to both communities, as it exposes the users of each to the benefits of the other.
 
You are right, they did not. As it turns out, decisions to integrate both ETC and REP were a bit special. We were pushed into ETC in integration by the market at the time of the ETH/ETC fork as we already had ETH integrated and the users naturally expected us to credit them their ETC as well; it was a lot of tedious work for very little benefit. As for REP, we integrated it before REP event went live on the Ethereum network as an attempt to provide the first liquid price discovery for REP, but unfortunately that didn't catch on as well as we would have wanted it to.

For a small start-up exchange, integrating a new currency is always a risky game. It takes precious resources that could be spent otherwise, but the trading might not catch on. What we are trying to do here is mitigate this risk with DASH. Not getting funded here will push DASH integration down the priority list, thereby postponing the decision whether to do it for months, and then it may never happen as there are always new things to do in crypto.

We also honestly believe that integrating two cryptos, DASH and Ripple, will bring synergic benefits to both communities, as it exposes the users of each to the benefits of the other.

As a condition of the proposal, would you sign a contract that no other altcoin would be integrated onto your platform for 12 months unless they paid at least the same integration cost as DASH?
 
As a condition of the proposal, would you sign a contract that no other altcoin would be integrated onto your platform for 12 months unless they paid at least the same integration cost as DASH?
I like this idea. It looks like a win-win solution. Dash community will not feel like they are being milked, ripple will get their Dash funds and possibly even more when other coins will want to join.
 
How dash would be held in your wallet? Single hotwallet setup?

Me and my team done quite some work on ripple ledger since 2013 and, if MNO consider integration with the Ripple useful, I may start a competing proposal :)
 
How dash would be held in your wallet? Single hotwallet setup?

No, a hot wallet + cold wallet. We already use this kind of setup for all supported currencies (BTC, ETH, ETC, REP).

Me and my team done quite some work on ripple ledger since 2013 and, if MNO consider integration with the Ripple useful, I may start a competing proposal :)

That sounds great! One of the things I like about Ripple is that if a currency is supported by several gateways, as is currently the case with all big currencies (BTC, USD, ETH, CNY, JPY, and others), this tends to create synergic effect due to new markets opening, the added ability for users to quickly transfer funds between gateways, the possibility to withdraw if one of the gateways is down, etc. We don't see another DASH gateway on Ripple as competition at all; quite the contrary.

If the DASH community realizes the synergic effects of having several Ripple gateways, both proposals might get funded for even greater benefit to the community as the sum of both.
 
As a condition of the proposal, would you sign a contract that no other altcoin would be integrated onto your platform for 12 months unless they paid at least the same integration cost as DASH?
I don't believe this is necessary for this project. I can't speak for them, but their business model revolves around adding more cryptos to the Ripple network so I can't imagine them signing something like this for this project. This project is about making Dash the next crypto they add ahead of LTC I would assume and other cryptos added to the network would just add more trading pairs for Dash. At any rate, I could support a project like this so it will have my vote.
 
Their answers to my questions were very thorough and satisfying. They definitely seem honest and and legit.

I don't know enough about Ripple to assess the value of this proposal.

I would prefer to see a proposal like this take place over two months -- month 1 deposit to start work and show progress, month 2 final payment and delivery. That way we are less likely to get chumped.
 
I don't believe this is necessary for this project. I can't speak for them, but their business model revolves around adding more cryptos to the Ripple network so I can't imagine them signing something like this for this project. This project is about making Dash the next crypto they add ahead of LTC I would assume and other cryptos added to the network would just add more trading pairs for Dash. At any rate, I could support a project like this so it will have my vote.

Yes they are about adding cryptos, but the point is, Dash shouldn't be the only crypto that has to pay to be added. If we are paying for initial integration cost, why would another coin be exempt from that same cost? If we are paying for a first mover advantage, then it's not really a first mover advantage if they can add more coins tomorrow. Either way, whether we are paying for first mover advantage and/or to cover initial cost, it makes sense to have a provision like that. Unless there is some valid reason why another coin should be added for free within a few months after dash pays?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top