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 ) id 1YDI45-0006Tb-Jp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:32:45 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.214.174 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.174; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-ob0-f174.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YDI44-000817-Hh for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:32:45 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id wo20so20575963obc.5 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:32:39 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=ERf828icKk63epW8wkrdn3XxJu23Xco99AejcSzWYTQ=; b=dz+hi1MzRxxnG311o1lIN4T2fQeaT2ghPZ1zHKFPYyTISkt2hs2v0RpL+zV6fvappb ocMaZZDTwFrIal1O+V7ohpHcf/Fyb8w7wzAtO81HnremzzzDZoTBn23RhhaGKmlCsmpk cD2k2s0T9wWFpt7jxSLQvSx0y/7+i+DsPbgLz0OUGuuhzIa5M5msVSJbxBhbkn/MvGYi 84EMdf36/oHDZV6EccZocIiQPlnU5qs7xjQac5pzb3pnJWIrmb3FXCNYleJX78N/cPrE j5yp8jEXvK5u5x7FF3DiTjxqtVkx4ogiB0EkryqFAXf2lpDXpFJI9dTznGjjPmLvexDt lj9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnpNuaCgHAYTH0zrVnF3s3eyzN+DZD+vDVlkdGaxu4ULOTXZxxY8eYPuX4QXuwhoRGexslh X-Received: by 10.202.61.9 with SMTP id k9mr7364455oia.116.1421694574285; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:09:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.219.196 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 11:09:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jeff Garzik Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:09:13 -0500 Message-ID: To: Richard Brady Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cd2a8146c1b050d061057 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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: 1YDI44-000817-Hh Cc: Bitcoin Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP70: why Google Protocol Buffers for encoding? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:32:45 -0000 --001a113cd2a8146c1b050d061057 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Text formats such as XML or JSON are far less deterministic, are more loosely specified, have wide variance in parsing, are not very hash-able, the list goes on. On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Richard Brady wrote: > Hi Gavin, Mike and co > > Is there a strong driver behind the choice of Google Protocol Buffers for > payment request encoding in BIP-0070? > > Performance doesn't feel that relevant when you think that: > 1. Payment requests are not broadcast, this is a request / response flow, > much more akin to a web request. > 2. One would be cramming this data into a binary format just so you can > then attach it to a no-so-binary format such as HTTP. > > Some great things about protocols/encodings such as HTTP/JSON/XML are: > 1. They are human readable on-the-wire. No Wireshark plugin required, > tcpdump or ngrep will do. > 2. There are tons of great open source libraries and API for parsing / > manipulating / generating. > 3. It's really easy to hand-craft a test message for debugging. > 4. The standards are much easier to read and write. They don't need to > contain code like BIP-0070 currently does and they can contain examples, > which BIP70 does not. > 5. They are thoroughly specified by independent standards bodies such as > the IETF. Gotta love a bit of MUST / SHOULD / MAY in a standard. > 6. They're a family ;-) > > Keen to hear your thoughts on this and very keen to watch the payment > protocol grow regardless of encoding choice! My background is SIP / VoIP > and I think that could be a fascinating use case for this protocol which > I'm hoping to do some work on. > > Best, > Richard > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. > GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. > Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. > Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ --001a113cd2a8146c1b050d061057 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Text formats such as XML or JSON are far less deterministi= c, are more loosely specified, have wide variance in parsing, are not very = hash-able, the list goes on.


On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Richard Brady <r= nbrady@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Gavin, Mike and co

Is there a strong d= river behind the choice of Google Protocol Buffers for payment request enco= ding in BIP-0070?

Performance doesn't feel tha= t relevant when you think that:
1. Payment requests are not broad= cast, this is a request / response flow, much more akin to a web request.
2. One would be cramming this data into a binary format just so yo= u can then attach it to a no-so-binary format such as HTTP.=C2=A0

Some great things about protocols/encodings such as HTTP/JS= ON/XML are:
1. They are human readable on-the-wire. No Wireshark = plugin required, tcpdump or ngrep will do.
2. There are tons of g= reat open source libraries and API for parsing / manipulating / generating.=
3. It's really easy to hand-craft a test message for debuggi= ng.
4. The standards are much easier to read and write. They = don't need to contain code like BIP-0070 currently does and they can co= ntain examples, which BIP70 does not.=C2=A0
5. They are thoroughl= y specified by independent standards bodies such as the IETF. Gotta love a = bit of MUST / SHOULD / MAY in a standard.
6. They're a family= ;-)

Keen to hear your thoughts on this and very k= een to watch the payment protocol grow regardless of encoding choice! My ba= ckground is SIP / VoIP and I think that could be a fascinating use case for= this protocol which I'm hoping to do some work on.

Best,
Richard


-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -------
New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/s= fu/gigenet
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment




--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelis= t
BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://bitpay.com/
--001a113cd2a8146c1b050d061057--