Existing Technology

There have been existing technologies that attempted to solve the problem of blockchain inter-communication and interoperability. These projects, although pursuing dissimilar goals, have all produced alternative solutions to this particular problem. While the solution proposed by AERO is a novel overarching solution that differs in functionality and application from these existing technologies, we can find merit in discussing these technologies in comparison to AERO. Some of these existing technologies include Polkadot, Aion, Sidechain, Cosmos, Interledger, and VirtualChain

The communication level proposed by AERO will take place over the transaction level, as is seen with the VirtualChain architecture. In comparison, Interledger and Sidechain favor a transaction level communication protocol, while Cosmos, Aion, and Polkadot all use a protocolbased transaction level for legacy levels. Cosmos, Polkadot, and Aion shared another similarity in interoperability

Both the existing technologies and the AERO deploy a two-phase commit connection method. However, the major differences lie in their connection speeds. Interledger uses notaries and entity consensus while Virtualchain focuses on migration time. Cosmos connection speed is proportional to the number of validators, Aion’s and Polkadot’s are dependent on the protocol time, and Sidechain uses its confirmation and contest period. For AERO connection speed, a flexible protocol time dependent approach is favored.