Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VrWW4-00034M-6o for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:27:08 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.51; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f51.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.219.51]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VrWW1-0004RF-Fa for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:27:08 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id i7so2370158oag.38 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:27:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.16.33 with SMTP id c1mr2541495obd.4.1386955620002; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:27:00 -0800 (PST) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.92.72 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:26:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:26:59 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2kUp-qTFwMnYnrzcwFRE45wsikc Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Gavin Andresen Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04479f930cd03a04ed6dc5c1 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: payr.com] X-Headers-End: 1VrWW1-0004RF-Fa Cc: Bitcoin Dev , Paul Rabahy Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Merge avoidance and P2P connection encryption 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, 13 Dec 2013 17:27:08 -0000 --f46d04479f930cd03a04ed6dc5c1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Why would there be an iteration count? The payer would handle that, > wouldn't they? > I'm thinking about a use case I hope will become common next year - pastebin style hosting sites for payment requests. Like, if I as a regular end user wish to use the payment protocol, I could just upload a (possibly signed) payment request to: payr.com/a62gahZ or whatever, and then payr.com can take care of incrementing the iteration count on each download of my file. That's why it's useful for it to be unsigned. > If the use case is: I give the Foundation a "here's where to pay my > salary" PaymentRequest, maybe with several Outputs each having a different > xpubkey, then it seems to me the Foundation's wallet software should take > care of iterating. > Absolutely. The two use cases can both be supported. You could give iteration ranges, for instance, if you want to specify expiry in terms of number of payments rather than time. --f46d04479f930cd03a04ed6dc5c1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Why would there be an= iteration count? The payer would handle that, wouldn't they?

I'm thinking abou= t a use case I hope will become common next year - pastebin style hosting s= ites for payment requests. Like, if I as a regular end user wish to use the= payment protocol, I could just upload a (possibly signed) payment request = to:


or whatever, and then payr.com can take care of incrementing the iteration count on each do= wnload of my file. That's why it's useful for it to be unsigned.
=C2=A0
If the use case is: =C2=A0I give the Foundation a = "here's where to pay my salary" PaymentRequest, maybe with se= veral Outputs each having a different xpubkey, then it seems to me the Foun= dation's wallet software should take care of iterating.

Absolutely. The two use = cases can both be supported. You could give iteration ranges, for instance,= if you want to specify expiry in terms of number of payments rather than t= ime.
--f46d04479f930cd03a04ed6dc5c1--