Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.214.180 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ob0-f180.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAJHLa0MVbDnC0i+uT9Sahxk8ht9R5ztSJ-kOU5ERapeVibH9eg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <lc409d$4mf$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<CABsx9T1Y3sO6eS54wsj377BL4rGoghx1uDzD+SY3tTgc1PPbHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP0ENhJJhba8Xwj_cVzNKGDUQriia_Q=JWTXpztb6ic8rg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEY8wq4QEO1rtaNdjHXR6-b3Cgi7pfSWk7M8khVi0MHCiVOBzQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBgUNYqYm7d4Rv+f0rBa=nSuqwmZ6_REBS7M-+Wea+za0g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJHLa0MVbDnC0i+uT9Sahxk8ht9R5ztSJ-kOU5ERapeVibH9eg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 16:01:52 +0100
Message-ID: <CANEZrP2nm4=Co48TebL1b1gQVP4oPG0RePa01cqRe1Zqod2gwg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0102dc826710f004f13156dc
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP70: PaymentACK semantics
Precedence: list

--089e0102dc826710f004f13156dc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> Is this truly the intent?  That the merchant/processor takes full
> responsibility for getting the TX confirmed?


As per Gavin at the top of the thread, the intent is to give the customer
reassurance that their payment will be processed. The merchant trying to
get the tx confirmed is presumably a part of that as it'd make no sense for
a merchant to give that assurance and decide they don't care about the
money.

But nothing stops the user broadcasting the tx as well, once the receiver
has given that assurance.

--089e0102dc826710f004f13156dc
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"><span style=3D"color:rgb(34,34=
,34)">Is this truly the intent? =C2=A0That the merchant/processor takes ful=
l</span><br>
</div>
responsibility for getting the TX confirmed?</blockquote><div><br></div><di=
v>As per Gavin at the top of the thread, the intent is to give the customer=
 reassurance that their payment will be processed. The merchant trying to g=
et the tx confirmed is presumably a part of that as it&#39;d make no sense =
for a merchant to give that assurance and decide they don&#39;t care about =
the money.</div>
<div><br></div><div>But nothing stops the user broadcasting the tx as well,=
 once the receiver has given that assurance.=C2=A0</div></div></div></div>

--089e0102dc826710f004f13156dc--