<p>Ripple is actually a permissioned "chain", even if we stretch what the definition of a chain is. It is run by validators and as far as I know, it is not permissionless (which I equate with "trustless"). </p>

<p>I do not see a specific need for a permissionless network to have its own coin or token. It could in theory still be driven on top of an already-existing coin from another network. It depends alot on your proof-of-what algorithm. You could have a network that awards "miners" ETH for doing "work" even if your own network does not have its own native token, per se.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-02-10T04:53:54.197Z
2019-02-10T04:53:54.197Z
Neeraj Murarka
<p>We may certainly say that a <strong>"permissioned"</strong> blockchain <strong>cannot</strong> have a <strong>native coin</strong> (or cryptocurreny) since in <strong>permissioned</strong> blockchain we need a permission to be eligible to participate for transactions validation and so having a native coin in a permissioned blockchain is not meaningful. </p>

<p>However, on the other hand, can we say that having a <strong>native coin/cryptocurrency</strong> for a <strong>"permissionless"</strong> blockchain is <strong>crucial</strong>? Or is there any <strong>permissionless</strong> blockchain <strong>without native coin</strong>? In that case, how to ensure security and how to motivate miners/validators for participation in transactions validation? </p>

<blockchain><currencies><terminology>
Is there any "permissionless" blockchain "without a native coin"?
Questioner
# Is there any "permissionless" blockchain "without a native coin"?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-02-09)

We may certainly say that a **"permissioned"** blockchain **cannot** have a **native coin** (or cryptocurreny) since in **permissioned** blockchain we need a permission to be eligible to participate for transactions validation and so having a native coin in a permissioned blockchain is not meaningful.

However, on the other hand, can we say that having a **native coin/cryptocurrency** for a **"permissionless"** blockchain is **crucial**? Or is there any **permissionless** blockchain **without native coin**? In that case, how to ensure security and how to motivate miners/validators for participation in transactions validation?

**Tags:** blockchain, currencies, terminology


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2019-02-10. Score: 1

Ripple is actually a permissioned "chain", even if we stretch what the definition of a chain is. It is run by validators and as far as I know, it is not permissionless (which I equate with "trustless").

I do not see a specific need for a permissionless network to have its own coin or token. It could in theory still be driven on top of an already-existing coin from another network. It depends alot on your proof-of-what algorithm. You could have a network that awards "miners" ETH for doing "work" even if your own network does not have its own native token, per se.


---

