diff options
author | Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> | 2013-12-04 14:48:08 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2013-12-04 13:48:16 +0000 |
commit | ced9af7b5c5262ed16a8ea71e0a4351e3107243b (patch) | |
tree | d04063a91b7f4c460b9a7180b45943e3944ce598 | |
parent | 428371adbfdbfa1a6381d5c8aa5758b75408cb79 (diff) | |
download | pi-bitcoindev-ced9af7b5c5262ed16a8ea71e0a4351e3107243b.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-ced9af7b5c5262ed16a8ea71e0a4351e3107243b.zip |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Floating fees and SPV clients
-rw-r--r-- | fe/495c03e180ed8f690823fee6374ae63ec5a10a | 128 |
1 files changed, 128 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/fe/495c03e180ed8f690823fee6374ae63ec5a10a b/fe/495c03e180ed8f690823fee6374ae63ec5a10a new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f0f432e01 --- /dev/null +++ b/fe/495c03e180ed8f690823fee6374ae63ec5a10a @@ -0,0 +1,128 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1VoCoK-0001Ze-QX + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Wed, 04 Dec 2013 13:48:16 +0000 +Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com + designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender) + client-ip=209.85.214.47; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; + helo=mail-bk0-f47.google.com; +Received: from mail-bk0-f47.google.com ([209.85.214.47]) + by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1VoCoJ-0003am-TD + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Wed, 04 Dec 2013 13:48:16 +0000 +Received: by mail-bk0-f47.google.com with SMTP id mx12so6502522bkb.6 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Wed, 04 Dec 2013 05:48:09 -0800 (PST) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.204.243.2 with SMTP id lk2mr44244bkb.94.1386164889230; Wed, + 04 Dec 2013 05:48:09 -0800 (PST) +Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com +Received: by 10.204.237.74 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 05:48:08 -0800 (PST) +In-Reply-To: <20131204130643.GA5313@tilt> +References: <CANEZrP1C=Hc-3f-rqQ+wYrPn-eUj52HjN+qRQdJMWvnP+dkK=Q@mail.gmail.com> + <CAJHLa0P_uzEQ2OG2FTXyD2Zw4RzujNBxKbKD04CSS1sLNpLUUQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CANEZrP2hf2853w9f4__Ji9v3eRRU0u6pEzPxAmFN+iH067gtnA@mail.gmail.com> + <CABsx9T3NQDPL6=pz5BD5DsP0qh0x3LJOCj2H3yY5tzL2_DivGA@mail.gmail.com> + <CANEZrP1PLKemiUEgMJRGdiZXt7o=0_5fhLKYY0x3Ngb_iEm+2w@mail.gmail.com> + <CABsx9T322nCvynRCL6Mb9C0f5EuJSfMDTSGiU+_JsYoSCb=_kQ@mail.gmail.com> + <op.w7jnreqwyldrnw@laptop-air.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> + <CANEZrP3D4WhXTdMAT7B=DaXEOSdXESc+bU0n7enu7hSaGtns8A@mail.gmail.com> + <e4515a76-b4c1-4a5f-a884-6d692b8d3466@email.android.com> + <CANEZrP287DH6JSMjAdu53_omrA96f5aQMZKObT1=VV5vqk=JBA@mail.gmail.com> + <20131204130643.GA5313@tilt> +Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 14:48:08 +0100 +X-Google-Sender-Auth: EIEdwXCh9CvwlArPMQhWLyN8Ayk +Message-ID: <CANEZrP2D_9AZXT2b5cgyiO3T9Udhk33tbNxBYSa16W7xL7_woA@mail.gmail.com> +From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> +To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0420ab03d2d31f04ecb5a929 +X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. + -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for + sender-domain + 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider + (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) + -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record + 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. + See + http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block + for more information. [URIs: petertodd.org] + 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message + 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, + not necessarily valid + -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature +X-Headers-End: 1VoCoJ-0003am-TD +Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Floating fees and SPV clients +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 13:48:17 -0000 + +--f46d0420ab03d2d31f04ecb5a929 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 + +On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote: + +> replace-by-fee is no less speculative than your original proposals; +> you're also trying to convince people that things should work +> differently re: fees + + +The original proposal I started this thread with hasn't even received +comments - presumably it's uncontroversial. The other discussions are about +how to handle fees in requests that use the payment protocol, which isn't +currently used anywhere so doing things differently isn't possible. + +On the other hand you have been talking about a fundamental change to the +behaviour of how all Bitcoin nodes operate, which is off topic for this +thread. + +If you have something specific to say about how floating fees should be +managed by SPV wallets or how fees should be negotiated when the payment +protocol is in use, this thread is appropriate. Otherwise please take it +elsewhere. + +--f46d0420ab03d2d31f04ecb5a929 +Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On W= +ed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Peter Todd <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mai= +lto:pete@petertodd.org" target=3D"_blank">pete@petertodd.org</a>></span>= + wrote:<br> +</div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D= +"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,2= +04,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D""><div clas= +s=3D"h5"> +<span style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34)">replace-by-fee is no less speculative t= +han your original proposals;</span><br></div></div> +you're also trying to convince people that things should work<br> +differently re: fees</blockquote><div><br></div><div>The original proposal = +I started this thread with hasn't even received comments - presumably i= +t's uncontroversial. The other discussions are about how to handle fees= + in requests that use the payment protocol, which isn't currently used = +anywhere so doing things differently isn't possible.</div> +<div><br></div><div>On the other hand you have been talking about a fundame= +ntal change to the behaviour of how all Bitcoin nodes operate, which is off= + topic for this thread.</div><div><br></div><div>If you have something spec= +ific to say about how floating fees should be managed by SPV wallets or how= + fees should be negotiated when the payment protocol is in use, this thread= + is appropriate. Otherwise please take it elsewhere.=C2=A0</div> +</div></div></div> + +--f46d0420ab03d2d31f04ecb5a929-- + + |