Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.219.44 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.219.44; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-oa0-f44.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <85A1792C-502E-4AC6-B8BC-A10C8FC1917F@bitsofproof.com>
References: <CANEZrP0AwR3WgHfwYWcrC9Z_MHPDwymWXAQwp7D8XZ+o2FsK8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<612FFAAD-14FF-4261-927D-BD2E0F287257@bitsofproof.com>
	<D7D06593-1987-490A-8DCD-21922E022E39@bitsofproof.com>
	<CABsx9T1POJ3KTqSz_c=SdYTg=EKWa9jqjOpHPZoMoPGXozsvJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<85A1792C-502E-4AC6-B8BC-A10C8FC1917F@bitsofproof.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:23:10 +0100
Message-ID: <CANEZrP26+hWJaFYkZ2oUKhr9FQ03CXCdvt8V1Mm4mGJaPCy2Hw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7ba9818c8a9b7404f5ac47fc
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 70 refund field
Precedence: list

--047d7ba9818c8a9b7404f5ac47fc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

So I take it BOPShop won't be supporting BIP70 then? :(


On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>wrote:

> I have nothing against incremental development. This will however not pick
> up until it offers some incremental benefit compared to current payment
> processor solutions,
> such as e.g.
>
> 1. Symmetrical. One can also offer a payment.
> 2. Aggregating and Netting. Handle multiple installments and/or net with
> previous cash flows.
> 3. More secure. One has a check not only on the payment address (which
> already has one with https:// in the web shop scenario it is currently
> able support) but not on the refund.
>
>
> On 28.03.2014, at 15:01, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>wrote:
>
>> May I ask how the current payment protocol is supposed to handle salaries?
>>
>
> It doesn't.
>
> "walk before you run" and all that; lets see what problems we run into
> with the minimal payment protocol we have now (like refund outputs you have
> to remember forever) before we create an insurmountable set of problems by
> trying to solve everything we can think of all at once.
>
> --
> --
> Gavin Andresen
>
>
>

--047d7ba9818c8a9b7404f5ac47fc
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">So I take it BOPShop won&#39;t be supporting BIP70 then? :=
(</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri=
, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Tamas Blummer <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"m=
ailto:tamas@bitsofproof.com" target=3D"_blank">tamas@bitsofproof.com</a>&gt=
;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word"><div>I h=
ave nothing against incremental development. This will however not pick up =
until it offers some incremental benefit compared to current payment proces=
sor solutions,=C2=A0</div>
<div>such as e.g.</div><div><br></div><div>1. Symmetrical. One can also off=
er a payment.</div><div>2. Aggregating and Netting. Handle multiple install=
ments and/or net with previous cash flows.</div><div>3. More secure. One ha=
s a check not only on the payment address (which already has one with https=
:// in the web shop scenario it is currently able support) but not on the r=
efund.</div>
<div><div class=3D"h5"><div><br></div><div>
<br><div><div>On 28.03.2014, at 15:01, Gavin Andresen &lt;<a href=3D"mailto=
:gavinandresen@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gavinandresen@gmail.com</a>&gt;=
 wrote:</div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"g=
mail_extra">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Tamas Blummer <=
span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:tamas@bitsofproof.com" target=3D"_bl=
ank">tamas@bitsofproof.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word">May I as=
k how the current payment protocol is supposed to handle salaries?</div></b=
lockquote>

<div><br></div><div>It doesn&#39;t.</div><div><br></div><div>&quot;walk bef=
ore you run&quot; and all that; lets see what problems we run into with the=
 minimal payment protocol we have now (like refund outputs you have to reme=
mber forever) before we create an insurmountable set of problems by trying =
to solve everything we can think of all at once.</div>

</div><div><br></div>-- <br>--<br>Gavin Andresen<br>
</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div=
>

--047d7ba9818c8a9b7404f5ac47fc--