Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <tamas@bitsofproof.com>) id 1WTZuf-0004pv-PW for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:45:49 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from wp059.webpack.hosteurope.de ([80.237.132.66]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1WTZue-0007eX-76 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:45:49 +0000 Received: from [37.143.74.116] (helo=[192.168.2.2]); authenticated by wp059.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1WTZuX-0006WA-9m; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:45:41 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B36423AC-A87B-4A92-A527-4D39E36BB395"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) From: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com> In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP1suCiiJEctAZ4FXMvNXsg8p1avS2CY3yJ8W=_MTBBTig@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:45:40 +0100 Message-Id: <295BFE86-52F6-4664-91B1-78FDCACA2EEC@bitsofproof.com> References: <CANEZrP0AwR3WgHfwYWcrC9Z_MHPDwymWXAQwp7D8XZ+o2FsK8g@mail.gmail.com> <612FFAAD-14FF-4261-927D-BD2E0F287257@bitsofproof.com> <D7D06593-1987-490A-8DCD-21922E022E39@bitsofproof.com> <CABsx9T1POJ3KTqSz_c=SdYTg=EKWa9jqjOpHPZoMoPGXozsvJA@mail.gmail.com> <85A1792C-502E-4AC6-B8BC-A10C8FC1917F@bitsofproof.com> <CANEZrP26+hWJaFYkZ2oUKhr9FQ03CXCdvt8V1Mm4mGJaPCy2Hw@mail.gmail.com> <C3A3E8C1-CBAB-4FF7-8944-BE65B41BBDD9@bitsofproof.com> <CANEZrP1suCiiJEctAZ4FXMvNXsg8p1avS2CY3yJ8W=_MTBBTig@mail.gmail.com> To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de; tamas@bitsofproof.com; 1396025148; 2f88dd27; X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1WTZue-0007eX-76 Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 70 refund field 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: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:45:50 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_B36423AC-A87B-4A92-A527-4D39E36BB395 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0DE4A486-1390-4F83-8E44-2630AD77B761" --Apple-Mail=_0DE4A486-1390-4F83-8E44-2630AD77B761 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 28.03.2014, at 17:34, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote: > Supporting BIP70 by BitPay or BopShop is a cake since it does no more = then they did without it. > I am not in opposition but see no reason to be enthusiastic about it. = I will once the spec goes > further than what was possible before. >=20 > So, if e.g. Trezor ships a firmware update that uses BIP70 to present = signed payment identities on the screen, would you support it then? Yes that would be neat and I would not want to spoil the show. I wish = the established identity could be re-used though to send and much more. --Apple-Mail=_0DE4A486-1390-4F83-8E44-2630AD77B761 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii <html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On 28.03.2014, at 17:34, Mike Hearn <<a href="mailto:mike@plan99.net">mike@plan99.net</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Supporting BIP70 by BitPay or BopShop is a cake since it does no more then they did without it.<br> I am not in opposition but see no reason to be enthusiastic about it. I will once the spec goes<br> further than what was possible before.<br> </blockquote></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">So, if e.g. Trezor ships a firmware update that uses BIP70 to present signed payment identities on the screen, would you support it then?</div></div> </blockquote></div><br><div>Yes that would be neat and I would not want to spoil the show. I wish the established identity could be re-used though to send and much more.</div></body></html> --Apple-Mail=_0DE4A486-1390-4F83-8E44-2630AD77B761-- --Apple-Mail=_B36423AC-A87B-4A92-A527-4D39E36BB395 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTNac0AAoJEPZykcUXcTkcC0sH/1mELAqBh8JZ3q6P/VnL04iQ hO87XmTgHM+e1gUJrCTQZ5XBaLJjFEtoEkBvjvdqyixpbhESPgrYWuncOZrDWSuv J+cXlBeZH7/BbgJyzWqsVZ9DXi0uQ3NmlbtdIWS8phL0PyNRaw+NOo8RrTMfA+vH igC4ynmyZVdUhLBjPZBCnayqVOB7M8bf9ZpmcP2H1xLslIYf0aMcy4zStLFGzpei F0MEAt0ZIFBtIvL6EH9Z2kA2cJASf5DYwEUvHkoIpJXqIkLj2WKvmUh28zuQpEx7 WC6WZmnND+1NEg2KCfAb2f5MmWDtPG4uvDa0VXyVTy1xWMczYp3fkIT/et2ZgJ4= =wGTZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_B36423AC-A87B-4A92-A527-4D39E36BB395--