Message-ID: <52EA3FAD.5080802@borboggle.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 19:03:57 +0700
From: Chuck <chuck+bitcoindev@borboggle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
References: <52E9E787.8080304@borboggle.com>	<CANEZrP0soR0xRqW=vsKaL__HRuWstA5vW=6_JkGZm=8wkm8Q3g@mail.gmail.com>	<52EA343E.4010208@borboggle.com>	<CAPg+sBg8AGrbny=2tXp3gsok4TX7XV5307Cx1+ArBwxM6xL4jQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CANEZrP2MHqw+c+AVSLzmc6A1xyMvVK=DfR_R-tH1ypGQLRqo_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBhzLVxdU+Kg2N7eW=34X1-6qbg1+rPzyMqfsy01zqnfGA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBhzLVxdU+Kg2N7eW=34X1-6qbg1+rPzyMqfsy01zqnfGA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Bitcoin-Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP70 message delivery reliability
Precedence: list

On 1/30/2014 7:02 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
>> With the way it works in bitcoinj, the tx is only committed to the wallet if
>> the server accepts the Payment message and ACKs it. So the tx would not be
>> retried if there's a failure submitting or some kind of internal server
>> error, and the UI would show that the payment failed. That seems
>> straightforward and how I'd expect things to work as a user.
> That's one right way to do it imho, but not what is suggested or
> required by the specification, and not what bitcoin core master
> currently implements.
>
If you sent the Payment message and the server goes silent after 
receiving it, you retry to delivery.  However, the merchant can 
broadcast the transactions and force them into your wallet anyway. You 
could, quite likely, pay and never get an ACK.