Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.210.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.210.175; envelope-from=jordanmack1981@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-iy0-f175.google.com; 
Sender: Jordan Mack <jordanmack1981@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EEE58C2.1040908@parhelic.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:18:58 -0800
From: Jordan Mack <jordanmack@parhelic.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <1323728469.78044.YahooMailNeo@web121012.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<1323979147.27319.140661012141129@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<4EEB7E98.8030006@dot-bit.org>
	<CAJna-HjXp4XEHnbmX0HKsMDmnxoWQQMmqujN+D9nLV0Zz_omcg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EEBBD84.6020907@dot-bit.org>
	<CAJ1JLtuhwdBC8jJsmS3pTUixdLwh0haB-Gq_CdEmEWYN0-z+QA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGQP0AH+J5Jo524o+EL9zNdHgpfTorTsyB+Ut4x0W-d9x84JZQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGQP0AH+J5Jo524o+EL9zNdHgpfTorTsyB+Ut4x0W-d9x84JZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP 15] Aliases
Precedence: list

I can't speak for Namecoin. As for the HTTPS requirement, I'm on the 
fence. Without it, the resolution is open to a man in the middle attack. 
Perhaps HTTPS should be required, and if HTTP is used, a large warning 
message is displayed.

As for the answered message format, is JSON the assumed structure that 
would be used?


On 12/18/2011 1:05 PM, Jorge Timón wrote:
> If we chose the simple URI proposal namecoin can still be integrated
> to map the IP of the server by those who want to.
> Does it removes the necessity of the certificates?
> If so, we should let people decide between HTTP, HTTPS, namecoin or
> whatever they trust.
>
> Shouldn't we be also discussing the valid format of the answered
> message? I mean fields like "amount", "concept" and such.
>