The ability to share information across different blockchain networks, without restrictions. By now, the technology has reached mainstream users, and a large number of enterprises and government agents have at least considered the benefits of having a blockchain in an array of industries — from agriculture and real estate to health care and voting. As a result, the blockchain space is becoming increasingly siloed, and its core philosophical concept — the idea of decentralization — is being undermined.
Currently, one blockchain has no knowledge of information that might exist in a different blockchain. For instance, the Bitcoin (BTC) blockchain exists fully independently of the Ethereum (ETH) blockchain — in the sense that it has no knowledge of any information recorded there — and vice versa.
Ethereum-centric development company ConsenSys has described this phenomenon as the “balkanization” of the crypto industry, as it involves “a series of unconnected systems operating alongside, but siloed from each other — in the face of competition and commercial pressure.” Blockchain interoperability, in turn, is the ability to exchange data between different blockchains seamlessly, as if there were no boundaries.
Originally tasked with the idea of topping BTC’s insufficient performance — the original blockchain can handle just seven transactions per second (TPS), at best — various blockchain projects have eventually started to report numbers as high as 40,000 TPS.
In contrast, the estimated capacity of the Visa network is around 24,000 TPS, although it ostensibly only has to do just 1,700 transactions each second on average, despite the ever-present demand. Any blockchain, even the one for Bitcoin, is far from beating Visa in terms of engagement — hence, 40,000 TPS could be seen as a bit of a stretch.
No corporation would want to process its payments with a blockchain, no matter how scalable, if the overall infrastructure is not interoperable and secure. Meanwhile, cards issued by global card schemes (i.e., Visa, MasterCard, American Express, etc.) are interoperable across merchants and ATMs worldwide. If it wasn’t interoperable, it wouldn’t be able to grow into what it is today — a truly global and easy-to-use network.
3. Are there any examples of why blockchain interoperability is important?
Every company uses a blockchain to store data. Now, the following scenario occurs: A person needs to be hospitalized and while he or she is being transported in the ambulance, the hospital requests their medical records from the clinic where this person is registered in order to develop the best treatment.
However, it turns out that the clinic uses a different blockchain, and it is not compatible with the hospital’s ledger. Mass adoption is not possible if there is no blockchain interoperability.
4. So, how it can be achieved?
There are different methods: cross-chains, sidechains, proxy tokens, swaps, etc. As per ConsenSys’ research on the topic, “commercialization promotes competition and innovation, incentivizing developers and entrepreneurs to build systems that work best for their customers.” As a result, open-source interoperability gets overlooked, and most blockchains have no built-in features that would support it.
Technically, Polkadot is comprised of parachains (i.e., parallel blockchains that process transactions and transfer them to the original blockchain), a relay chain (i.e., a central component that connects parachains and ensures their security), and bridges that connect Polkadot to external blockchains.
Since various established blockchains (like Bitcoin) do not support IBC by design, Cosmos uses the so-called “peg zones” to connect them to the “Cosmos Hub” — as the project is called — a “flagship” blockchain that binds all the zones together and coordinates communications between them via standardized languages.
However, the Cosmos Hub is a part of the larger interchain ecosystem developed by Cosmos that can contain other entities — for instance, there is also Iris Hub, which focuses on enterprise customers and Chinese clients.
It allows for data to be retrieved from off-chain APIs and be put on a blockchain. In other words, Chainlink serves as a bridge between blockchains and all the infrastructure that exists off-chain: Oracle nodes receive real-world data, process it through the network and take it to the blockchain.
Wanchain uses a different protocol to facilitate data transfers between otherwise unconnected blockchains.
For instance, to move 10 ETH to the BTC chain, the platform would first lock that amount of ETH on the Ethereum blockchain using smart contracts, which would then mint 10 Wanchain-wrapped ETH (WETH) on Wanchain.
Unlike the aforementioned examples, Quant is not a blockchain. Overledger ostensibly allows developers to create “MApps” — decentralized applications (DApps) that utilize multiple blockchains at the same time — in “three lines of code” and without any additional infrastructure. For instance, an MApp could rely on the Ethereum blockchain for data storage while using Bitcoin Cash (BCH) for value transfer.
Currently, it is the most popular — and a relatively convenient — method. However, it has its major drawbacks, security being the most obvious one (“not your keys, not your coins” is a famous proverb describing why depositing your assets to a hot wallet always involves risk). However, it is important to keep in mind that the blockchain space is still relatively new, and most of the aforementioned startups are at early stages of their roadmap.