MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55802D0D.4090506@thinlink.com>
References: <CAPswA9w5Sgg6AV=9Pqx5sqbkdrwv9LmwoxmMu7xZsQSNXtmZnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBjtovFpLoibpVGLsNJXexBcoiYzjrvctraXntCUZBJsGg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPswA9zhB4GV=JJ28RRLFNrkVwExUv36zujmuAjwPd6rG6rvzQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALJP9GCBJiofY7k2RJ460CuLuWQunHcx7EcLi1-d07v76Y-E2g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPswA9wqdbU0z8ydBt+9M0iQX0VSi1ce=dg3fR2_2bx3-vEqzA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPswA9z_xKY6v9=Ejh=01mZN0QCVo1e0RY1FTzXzS39i3tjgAw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPswA9xk5QYAXxQ6ES3cnNPeB1FTiiSJgLahLEkSk4CLpoM_QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBiWykR6RaHhbyYQbL=A5t1TmHgEmS_sC7jj9d3SUTMO9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPswA9zycU0pwZKaHU9J3Tvg=ovLJ8TZ9OH6ebTPONaRaiOE8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBhuth22+vAHyS2iwpze8X=-b2wJQ5s1z2FhZ1jsLXobgQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<557FB36B.1030902@thinlink.com>
	<CAPswA9xYoNCW8wRMC9cVDQ5Ww-L5J+pCqom5YC5-hzu9ggW8pw@mail.gmail.com>
	<55802D0D.4090506@thinlink.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 18:22:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPswA9yw8=tRep2o94ztRYp+K+sWvubYMDvS+usx+rpk6CrxAA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kalle Rosenbaum <kalle@rosenbaum.se>
To: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for Proof of Payment
Precedence: list

Thank you for the clarification Tom!

/Kalle

2015-06-16 16:05 GMT+02:00 Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>:
> On 6/16/2015 5:12 AM, Kalle Rosenbaum wrote:
>> 2015-06-16 7:26 GMT+02:00 Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>:
>>> Kalle goes to some trouble to describe how merchants need to ensure that
>>> they only accept a PoP provided as a response to their challenge.
>>>
>> Do you mean that it will be hard to explain to merchants that they
>> must check the nonce in the PoP so that it matches the nonce in the
>> pop request?
>
> Sorry for the idiomatic language.  No, I just meant that you have
> thought it out in detail!  You standardize a latent capability of the
> cryptosystem.  It seems very powerful for some classes of users.
>
>