Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1UeeLt-0004HU-Rz
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 21 May 2013 04:39:09 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 74.125.83.44 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=74.125.83.44; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ee0-f44.google.com; 
Received: from mail-ee0-f44.google.com ([74.125.83.44])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1UeeLt-0002TC-7Z
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 21 May 2013 04:39:09 +0000
Received: by mail-ee0-f44.google.com with SMTP id b57so92156eek.17
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 20 May 2013 21:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.14.206.136 with SMTP id l8mr1906954eeo.26.1369111142935;
	Mon, 20 May 2013 21:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.172.67 with HTTP; Mon, 20 May 2013 21:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRCpXUgw=GpE9_AcTgWcdCaDC6_16Xp5+oOZC0_1xmf-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <519AC3A8.1020306@quinnharris.me>
	<CA+i0-i_+Tes+ePRqmDGEXDQ_L=S5y8gHBKk77zaLgTGOS3OMyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBjmXyLkgfwzC8h+ZFkmyUf6nzbGo0oAWR9nsJOTOfOXEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgRCpXUgw=GpE9_AcTgWcdCaDC6_16Xp5+oOZC0_1xmf-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 21:39:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CABsx9T1nqGCL00Hmq11srMU-n_KVYm2t-EjsBkWBtf699AECwA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-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: 1UeeLt-0002TC-7Z
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Double Spend Notification
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: Tue, 21 May 2013 04:39:10 -0000

I'm very much in favor of double-spend propagation across the network.

Most of the arguments about replace-based-on-fee /
child-pays-burn-coins / etc are orthogonal.

Letting a merchant know ASAP that their customer is trying to cheat
them is, in my opinion, strictly better than what we have now.

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen