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 1WLqdP-0006cV-VL for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:00:03 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender) client-ip=80.91.229.3; envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org; helo=plane.gmane.org; Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1WLqdO-0002UZ-Ob for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:00:03 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WLqdG-0006OU-PP for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:59:54 +0100 Received: from f052199165.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.52.199.165]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:59:54 +0100 Received: from andreas by f052199165.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:59:54 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net From: Andreas Schildbach Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:59:43 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f052199165.adsl.alicedsl.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.91.229.3 listed in list.dnswl.org] -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL No valid author signature, domain signs all mail -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1WLqdO-0002UZ-Ob Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Instant / contactless payments 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: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:00:04 -0000 On 03/06/2014 07:03 PM, Alex Kotenko wrote: > Supporting Bluetooth is optional in the sense that if a wallet should > not support it, you will still receive the transaction via the P2P > network. So I'd say definately go for Bluetooth. > > ​Yes, it's part of the​ plan. Just again - I need to make sure we > support all major wallets. And no other wallets actually support NFC by > now, not talking about bluetooth. So I imagine we will decide and > implement together some solution here, both on the wallet and POS sides, > but I will have to keep URI method and even QR codes for backwards > compatibility, and wait for other main wallets to accept innovations > before we will be able to completely switch to it. > As I said earlier - bluetooth support for my POS is not a problem, we > can plug it in easily and make it work. Support among all > hardware/software and polished user experience - this is a main thing > here really. Sure, take all the time you need. All I wanted to say is you don't need to break Bitcoin URI compatibility in order to support direct payments via Bluetooth. It's simply an add-on, both in the BIP21 and the BIP70 cases.