Should a retail #CBDC infrastructure be based on #DLT or conventional technology? And should it involve digital #tokens inspired by #cryptocurrencies?

Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on facebook
Share on reddit
Share on pinterest

The below graph maps out the possible combinations. 

Conventional database often achieve hashtagresilience by storing data over multiple physical nodes, but all are controlled by a top node. By contrast, in many DLT-based systems, the ledger is jointly managed by all nodes. The communication needed to achieve hashtagconsensus between these nodes is the main reason why DLTs tend to have lower transaction throughput. As we argue in the below QR feature, this implies that the infrastructure choice can only be made once the architecture of the CBDC and the associated operational role of the central bank has been decided upon. Specifically, existing DLT likely could not be used for the “Direct CBDC architecture” in larger jurisdictions. When it comes to vulnerabilities, neither a DLT-based system nor a conventional one has a clear-cut advantage. The key vulnerability of a conventional architecture is the failure of the top node.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post